On 9 September 2011 23:18, Linas Vepstas (Code Aurora) <linas@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Fri, Sep 09, 2011 at 10:15:20PM +0200, Jonas Bonn wrote: >> >> That said, I don't think gdbserver has been updated to use >> GETREGSET/SETREGSET. This is a bit like the uClibc/glibc issue, > > Some dumb questions then: I notice that a few arches declare > struct user_regs_struct in glibc, most of the others in the > kernel. If I were to make pt_regs completely kernel-private, > then I really do need to have struct user_regs_struct declared > the kernel headers, right? Yes, on OpenRISC we declare it in ptrace.h (see arch/openrisc/include/asm/ptrace.h). > > Putting a printk into case PTRACE_POKEUSR seemed to show that > gdb was using this (and was somehow mis-numbering the registers > ... sigh.) Are you saying that the default should handle this? I'm really not an expert on GDB, but I believe it can use either the PEEK/POKE functions to access regs, or it can use GET/SETREGS; it's an architecture-dependent configuration. I think the second variant can be easily modified to become GET/SETREGSET instead, and the PEEK/POKE variant wouldn't be needed at all. /Jonas -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-arch" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
