On Fri, 2009-05-29 at 00:32 -0700, Roland McGrath wrote:
> Thanks! I'm very glad to finally see this ironed out by someone who
> actually knows about powerpc innards.
yeah, it's been on my todo list for some time... decided that it stayed
rotting for too long. We also did a little test program to
Thanks! I'm very glad to finally see this ironed out by someone who
actually knows about powerpc innards.
Thanks,
Roland
___
Linuxppc-dev mailing list
Linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org
https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
On Wed, 2009-04-01 at 14:59 -0700, Roland McGrath wrote:
> Maynard asked about user_enable_block_step() support on powerpc.
> This is the old patch I've posted before. I haven't even tried
> to compile it lately, but it rebased cleanly.
>
> AFAIK the only reason this didn't go in several months a
Josh Boyer writes:
> [...] While I would love to believe that systemtap should work
> everywhere, I can't really see it running on an embedded board at
> this point.
FWIW, we have had people running (not compiling) systemtap probe
modules on embedded systems. See "stap -p4" or "stap-server".
> I don't think having it working for BookE is really a requirement before this
> gets in though. If we can get it working with minimal effort for ppc64, that
> would help get systemtap and related things functioning correctly there.
Sure, just conditionalize arch_has_block_step() however is corr
On Thu, 2009-04-02 at 17:44 -0700, Roland McGrath wrote:
> > The patch only implements it for "server/classic" processors, not BookE,
> > thus it should probably only advertise it for these :-)
> >
> > Though it wouldn't be too hard to implement it for BookE using DBCR0:BRT
> > (Branch Taken debug
On Thu, Apr 02, 2009 at 05:44:50PM -0700, Roland McGrath wrote:
>> The patch only implements it for "server/classic" processors, not BookE,
>> thus it should probably only advertise it for these :-)
>>
>> Though it wouldn't be too hard to implement it for BookE using DBCR0:BRT
>> (Branch Taken debu
> The patch only implements it for "server/classic" processors, not BookE,
> thus it should probably only advertise it for these :-)
>
> Though it wouldn't be too hard to implement it for BookE using DBCR0:BRT
> (Branch Taken debug event) though it might need some careful fixups such
> as the one w
On Wed, 2009-04-01 at 14:59 -0700, Roland McGrath wrote:
> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/ptrace.h
> b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/ptrace.h
> index c9c678f..d7692b8 100644
> --- a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/ptrace.h
> +++ b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/ptrace.h
> @@ -135,7 +135,9 @@ do {
2001
From: Roland McGrath
Date: Thu, 1 May 2008 23:40:58 -0700
Subject: [PATCH] powerpc ptrace block-step
This adds block-step support on powerpc,
including a PTRACE_SINGLEBLOCK request for ptrace.
Signed-off-by: Roland McGrath
---
arch/powerpc/include/asm/ptrace.h |4
arch/power
On Thu, 2008-05-01 at 23:51 -0700, Roland McGrath wrote:
> I didn't test the booke variant of this (I don't have that hardware).
> I only tested it on a Mac G5 (ppc64, 970FX).
>
> There is a test program at:
>
> http://sources.redhat.com/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/~checkout~/tests/ptrace-tests/tests/bloc
or powerpc, remove the && 0 from this line:
# elif defined __powerpc__ && 0/* XXX not upstream yet */
and compile with -D_GNU_SOURCE.
Thanks,
Roland
---
[PATCH] powerpc ptrace block-step
This adds block-step support on powerpc,
including a PTRACE_SINGLEBLOCK request for ptra
12 matches
Mail list logo
