pt_regs.dbcr0/1
Armin
akuster at pacbell.net
Mon Jun 3 16:04:35 EST 2002
Paul Mackerras wrote:
> Is anyone prepared to speak up for the dbcr0 and dbcr1 fields that
> someone added to struct pt_regs for 4xx in the 2_4_devel tree?
>
> If not, they are going. If so, we can discuss it.
>
> Better still, does anyone have a clearly thought-out vision of how the
> debug facilities on 4xx should be managed?
>
> I would much prefer to see these fields put in the thread_struct
> rather than pt_regs. I am reluctant to change pt_regs without a good
> reason since it is visible to userspace and is therefore part of the
> kernel API. If the intention is to make the debug facilities
> available to userspace then the thread_struct is a good place to put
> fields relating to the debug facilities.
>
> Paul.
>
>
>
>
>
Oh man its been a while... hmmm IIRC I thought we used pt_regs for kgdb.
IIRC we already use the thread_struct for gdb. There are two people
who did the bulk of the debugger work, if they don't pipe up , I will do
my best.
I'll get back to you.
armin
** Sent via the linuxppc-embedded mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/
More information about the Linuxppc-embedded
mailing list