|
| From: | KONRAD Frederic |
| Subject: | Re: [PATCH v1] target/m68k: fix gdb for m68xxx |
| Date: | Tue, 28 Apr 2020 15:19:23 +0200 |
| User-agent: | Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.7.0 |
Le 4/27/20 à 9:53 AM, Laurent Vivier a écrit :
Le 20/04/2020 à 16:01, address@hidden a écrit :From: KONRAD Frederic <address@hidden> Currently "cf-core.xml" is sent to GDB when using any m68k flavor. Thing is it uses the "org.gnu.gdb.coldfire.core" feature name and gdb 8.3 then expects a coldfire FPU instead of the default m68881 FPU. This is not OK because the m68881 floats registers are 96 bits wide so it crashes GDB with the following error message: (gdb) target remote localhost:7960 Remote debugging using localhost:7960 warning: Register "fp0" has an unsupported size (96 bits) warning: Register "fp1" has an unsupported size (96 bits) ... Remote 'g' packet reply is too long (expected 148 bytes, got 180 bytes): \ 00000000000[...]0000 With this patch: qemu-system-m68k -M none -cpu m68020 -s -S (gdb) tar rem :1234 Remote debugging using :1234 warning: No executable has been specified and target does not support determining executable automatically. Try using the "file" command. 0x00000000 in ?? () (gdb) p $fp0 $1 = nan(0xffffffffffffffff) Signed-off-by: KONRAD Frederic <address@hidden> --- configure | 2 +- gdb-xml/m68k-core.xml | 29 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ target/m68k/cpu.c | 30 +++++++++++++++++++++++++----- 3 files changed, 55 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) create mode 100644 gdb-xml/m68k-core.xml diff --git a/configure b/configure index 23b5e93..2b07b85 100755 --- a/configure +++ b/configure @@ -7825,7 +7825,7 @@ case "$target_name" in ;; m68k) bflt="yes" - gdb_xml_files="cf-core.xml cf-fp.xml m68k-fp.xml" + gdb_xml_files="cf-core.xml cf-fp.xml m68k-core.xml m68k-fp.xml" TARGET_SYSTBL_ABI=common ;; microblaze|microblazeel) diff --git a/gdb-xml/m68k-core.xml b/gdb-xml/m68k-core.xml new file mode 100644 index 0000000..5b092d2 --- /dev/null +++ b/gdb-xml/m68k-core.xml @@ -0,0 +1,29 @@ +<?xml version="1.0"?> +<!-- Copyright (C) 2008 Free Software Foundation, Inc. + + Copying and distribution of this file, with or without modification, + are permitted in any medium without royalty provided the copyright + notice and this notice are preserved. --> +<!DOCTYPE feature SYSTEM "gdb-target.dtd"> +<feature name="org.gnu.gdb.m68k.core"> + <reg name="d0" bitsize="32"/> + <reg name="d1" bitsize="32"/> + <reg name="d2" bitsize="32"/> + <reg name="d3" bitsize="32"/> + <reg name="d4" bitsize="32"/> + <reg name="d5" bitsize="32"/> + <reg name="d6" bitsize="32"/> + <reg name="d7" bitsize="32"/> + <reg name="a0" bitsize="32" type="data_ptr"/> + <reg name="a1" bitsize="32" type="data_ptr"/> + <reg name="a2" bitsize="32" type="data_ptr"/> + <reg name="a3" bitsize="32" type="data_ptr"/> + <reg name="a4" bitsize="32" type="data_ptr"/> + <reg name="a5" bitsize="32" type="data_ptr"/> + <reg name="fp" bitsize="32" type="data_ptr"/> + <reg name="sp" bitsize="32" type="data_ptr"/> + + <reg name="ps" bitsize="32"/> + <reg name="pc" bitsize="32" type="code_ptr"/> + +</feature> diff --git a/target/m68k/cpu.c b/target/m68k/cpu.c index 9445fcd..976e624 100644 --- a/target/m68k/cpu.c +++ b/target/m68k/cpu.c @@ -297,6 +297,21 @@ static void m68k_cpu_class_init(ObjectClass *c, void *data) dc->vmsd = &vmstate_m68k_cpu; }+static void m68k_cpu_class_init_m68k_core(ObjectClass *c, void *data)+{ + CPUClass *cc = CPU_CLASS(c); + + cc->gdb_core_xml_file = "m68k-core.xml"; +}Could you also add a m68k_cpu_class_init_cf_core() and move the cf-core.xml into it?
Yes I can do that: - DEFINE_M68K_CPU_TYPE_M68K will use m68k_cpu_class_init_m68k_core. - DEFINE_M68K_CPU_TYPE_CF will use m68k_cpu_class_init_cf_core. - drop xxx_WITH_CLASS behind.
+ +#define DEFINE_M68K_CPU_TYPE_WITH_CLASS(cpu_model, initfn, classinit) \ + { \ + .name = M68K_CPU_TYPE_NAME(cpu_model), \ + .instance_init = initfn, \ + .parent = TYPE_M68K_CPU, \ + .class_init = classinit, \ + } +I would prefer to have two macros with no class parameter, something like DEFINE_M68K_CPU_TYPE_M68K() and DEFINE_M68K_CPU_TYPE_CF().#define DEFINE_M68K_CPU_TYPE(cpu_model, initfn) \ { \ .name = M68K_CPU_TYPE_NAME(cpu_model), \ @@ -314,11 +329,16 @@ static const TypeInfo m68k_cpus_type_infos[] = { .class_size = sizeof(M68kCPUClass), .class_init = m68k_cpu_class_init, }, - DEFINE_M68K_CPU_TYPE("m68000", m68000_cpu_initfn), - DEFINE_M68K_CPU_TYPE("m68020", m68020_cpu_initfn), - DEFINE_M68K_CPU_TYPE("m68030", m68030_cpu_initfn), - DEFINE_M68K_CPU_TYPE("m68040", m68040_cpu_initfn), - DEFINE_M68K_CPU_TYPE("m68060", m68060_cpu_initfn), + DEFINE_M68K_CPU_TYPE_WITH_CLASS("m68000", m68000_cpu_initfn, + m68k_cpu_class_init_m68k_core), + DEFINE_M68K_CPU_TYPE_WITH_CLASS("m68020", m68020_cpu_initfn, + m68k_cpu_class_init_m68k_core), + DEFINE_M68K_CPU_TYPE_WITH_CLASS("m68030", m68030_cpu_initfn, + m68k_cpu_class_init_m68k_core), + DEFINE_M68K_CPU_TYPE_WITH_CLASS("m68040", m68040_cpu_initfn, + m68k_cpu_class_init_m68k_core), + DEFINE_M68K_CPU_TYPE_WITH_CLASS("m68060", m68060_cpu_initfn, + m68k_cpu_class_init_m68k_core), DEFINE_M68K_CPU_TYPE("m5206", m5206_cpu_initfn), DEFINE_M68K_CPU_TYPE("m5208", m5208_cpu_initfn), DEFINE_M68K_CPU_TYPE("cfv4e", cfv4e_cpu_initfn),
But what about the "any" which is out of context here?
DEFINE_M68K_CPU_TYPE("any", any_cpu_initfn),
Should it be TYPE_M68K or TYPE_CF in which case which xml will it take? I guess
we can take TYPE_CF so it doesn't change from what is done today.
I think we can also have something like DEFINE_M68K_CPU_TYPE_M68K(m68000) or DEFINE_M68K_CPU_TYPE_CF(m5206) and deduce initfn function name from the macro parameter.
Why not. Fred
Thanks, Laurent
| [Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread] |