Xtensa port
Maxim Grigoriev
maxim@tensilica.com
Fri Sep 22 21:48:00 GMT 2006
Thanks for your comment, Michael,
I think I need to look closely at the "multi-arch" mechanism and see if
it's adequate to Xtensa configurability.
-- Maxim
Michael Snyder wrote:
> On Fri, 2006-09-22 at 12:10 -0700, Maxim Grigoriev wrote:
>
>> Michael,
>>
>> Thanks much for the quick response.
>>
>>> At a quick first glance, it looks pretty good.
>>> Do you have a copyright assignment on file
>>>
>>>
>> Once in a while, Daniel Jacobowitz mentioned that he has all the
>> necessary paper work for Xtensa port. I hope it still true.
>>
>>> One question -- is there a reason for splitting xtensa-config.c
>>> into a separate file? Not necessarily a problem, but it seems
>>> to be mostly stuff that would traditionally go in the xxx-tdep.c
>>> file (such as the struct gdbarch_tdep object).
>>>
>>>
>> It's because Xtensa is all about configurability. Historically,
>> Tensilica uses a special configuration called FSF for all our FSF
>> submissions. It's been used for Xtensa GCC and BFD work. Now, I'm trying
>> to use it for GDB. So when we have to deal with a different
>> configuration of the Xtensa processor all we need is to update
>> xtensa-config.c file.
>>
>
> Ah, but that's what we have a thing called multi-arch for!
>
> Wouldn't you rather have a single gdb that could debug *any*
> of your xtensa configurations (as opposed to having to build
> a separate gdb for each one)?
>
>
>
More information about the Gdb-patches
mailing list