Re: [Patch, microblaze]: Add slr and shr regs and little-endian breakpoint

[Michael Eager <eager at eagercon dot com>]

On 05/22/14 21:16, Ajit Kumar Agarwal wrote:

I can't tell which responses come from you or which you are
repeating from previous email.

See questions and comments below.  You need to address all
issues raised.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Michael Eager [mailto:eager@eagerm.com]
> Sent: Friday, May 23, 2014 1:15 AM
> To: Ajit Kumar Agarwal; Joel Brobecker
> Cc: Michael Eager; gdb-patches@sourceware.org; Vinod Kathail; Vidhumouli Hunsigida; Nagaraju Mekala
> Subject: Re: [Patch, microblaze]: Add slr and shr regs and little-endian breakpoint
>
> On 05/22/14 10:58, Ajit Kumar Agarwal wrote:
> > Thanks  Joel for the review comments. Will make sure to consider your suggestions
> >    when Submitting the new patches.
>
> Please don't top post.  Please trim your responses so they don't contain multiple copies of the same text.
>
> > Based on the feedback, the updated patch is given below.
> >
> > Okay for the upstream?
>
> An OK would only be appropriate if you had write access to the repository.
>
> >       [Patch, microblaze]: Add slr and shr regs
> >
> >       This patch add the support of slr and shr regs and also solves
> > the problem
>
> also?  Is there another unmentioned problem?
>
> >       related to process_g_packet where the buf_len > 2 * rsa->sizeof_g_packet
> >       and throwing the Error that 'g' packet message reply is too long. This is
> >       because the buf_len calculated in the init_remote_state function for
> >       microblaze target is based On the sizeof_g_packet and remote_packet_size
> >       and the memory_packet_config->size. The sizeof_g_packet is 236 because the
> >       number of reg num is 59 and 2* sizeof_g_packet comes to 472 .With shr and
> >       shl entry and the buf_len is 472. This does not match the greater than
> >       conditional statement  and works fine. Without shr and shl entry,the
> >       sizeof_g_packets comes to 57*4 *2 = 456.  This doesn't match the criteria
> >       in the process_g_packet function  leading to throwing of error message as
> >       " 'g' packet message reply is too long".
>
> > > Please make the description of the problem reasonably succinct.  A detailed analysis of how you identified the problem is not needed, especially when you mention the error message >>and the cause of the error multiple times.
>
> I have addressed the Joel comments and incorporated his suggestions.

Make sure you address my comments and incorporate my suggestions as well.


> What is running on the target?
>
> > > If this a problem using the XMD gdbserver stub which is returning more registers than GDB expects?
>
> This is not XMD gdbserver stub but related to number of registers we define microblaze-tdep.c.
>
> > > If that is the case, then say so.  Otherwise, what is the cause of the mismatch >>between the gdb G packet and the target?
>
> I have already replied the cause of the error and let me know if you need additional info.


I asked what is running on the target which is returning a different sized G packet.


> > Thanks, Ajit. FWIW, I agree with Michael.
> >
> > Also, when submitting the new patches, please include the description of the problem you are trying to solve in the revision log of your patch. Something like the description you gave above, for instance.
> > This makes archeology a lot easier for us.  The good news when doing that is that submitting the patch could be as simple as "git send-email"-ing the patch; that's what I personally do for my own patches, and it's been a real time saver.


Please resubmit the patch, following instructions.

Please start over, dropping all the discussion, answers, and
non-answers.  Being unwilling to answer details of a patch
which appears to be untestable is not likely to get it approved.

The subject line should indicate the patch you  are submitting,
not something which no longer describes the patch.



--
Michael Eager	 eager@eagercon.com
1960 Park Blvd., Palo Alto, CA 94306  650-325-8077