[rfc] Wrap addresses in spu-gdb

[Daniel Jacobowitz]

On Tue, Aug 21, 2007 at 11:56:07AM +0200, Markus Deuling wrote:
> So there are three issues:
> 
> 1) Should add-symbol-file set the function address to -in this case- 0x0 ?
>   SPU hardware would handle both 0x40000 and 0x80000 as 0x0.

I don't know the answer to this one, but the current behavior is
definitely strange.  My guess is that something has wrapped the values
to zero and decided that meant unspecified.

> 2) As seen in my example "add-symbol-file" loads two functions to the same 
> addresses 0x100.
>   Is this valid? 

Yes.

> 3) Should the used addresses in the testcase be changed to, for example,
>   0x10000 and 0x20000? This would work for SPU, too. Or shall I introduce
>   variables for this addresses and set them to a range < SPU_LS_SIZE for
>   SPU targets only?

I think changing the addresses is fine.

-- 
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery