RFA: AIX 64-bit mega-patch

Nick Duffek nsd@redhat.com
Tue Jun 13 19:06:00 GMT 2000

On 13-Jun-2000, David Edelsohn wrote:

>If I understand the code, it looks like you are using generic
>dummy frames for PowerPC and not for "rs6000" which I think means POWER


>I don't understand the reason for that difference.

That's how it was before I made my changes, and I kept the status quo.
Maybe generic dummy frames can be used for POWER as well; I'll look into

>Assuming the meaning of "rs6000", the hard-coded TOC offset may not be a
>problem (because POWER is only 32-bit)


>"PowerPC / RS6000 processor variant is ..." and "GDB knows about
>the following PowerPC and RS6000 variants ..."

Those messages are removed by the patch.

>RMS refused to allow early GCC and GDB to refer to the
>architecture as "POWER" because he did not want GNU software providing
>subliminal publicity for IBM given the spelling of the architecture name.

Ah, that's an interesting bit of history; it explains the dual use of the
term.  Maybe it'd be worth changing the nomenclature internal to


More information about the Gdb-patches mailing list