On Dec 11, 2009, at 2:07 PM, Thiago Jung Bauermann wrote: > On Fri 11 Dec 2009 00:27:36 Dave Kleikamp wrote: >> On Thu, 2009-12-10 at 20:23 -0600, Kumar Gala wrote: >>> On Dec 10, 2009, at 9:57 AM, Dave Kleikamp wrote: >>>> #define PPC_DEBUG_FEATURE_INSN_BP_RANGE 0x1 >>>> #define PPC_DEBUG_FEATURE_INSN_BP_MASK 0x2 >>>> #define PPC_DEBUG_FEATURE_DATA_BP_RANGE 0x4 >>>> #define PPC_DEBUG_FEATURE_DATA_BP_MASK 0x8 >>> >>> Is GDB smart enough to deal w/no condition_regs? On some Book-E >>> devices we have 2 IACs, 2 DACs, and 0 DVCs. Does it need to be in the >>> features? >> >> I had discussed it with the gdb team. I could easily add a feature >> flag, but it would be equivalent to num_condition_regs > 0. I don't >> have a strong opinion either way. > > The current GDB code we have here uses num_condition_regs > 0 to discover if > DVCs are supported, so a PPC_DEBUG_FEATURE constant for that is redundant > IMHO.
That's fine, just want to make sure we are ok w/num_condition_regs == 0. - k _______________________________________________ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
