On 02/04/2018 09:59 PM, Joel Sherrill wrote:
On Feb 4, 2018 2:35 PM, "Jiri Gaisler" <j...@gaisler.se <mailto:j...@gaisler.se>> wrote:On 02/01/2018 09:07 AM, Sebastian Huber wrote: On 31/01/18 17:54, Joel Sherrill wrote: Hi Perfect timing. Just as the RSB was updated and we have built new tools. :) Should we bump to 8.1? I would think it makes sense if it doesn't break anything. Needs the SIS patch an update? %patch add gdb https://gaisler.org/gdb/gdb-8.0.1-sis-leon2-leon3.diff <https://gaisler.org/gdb/gdb-8.0.1-sis-leon2-leon3.diff> %hash sha512 gdb-8.0.1-sis-leon2-leon3.diff f8aa851f50feb063dd63fc10018ed638c5bd1708b6b9f5d1c1e1030c8d30a24de3506bb233cc5e7e4392ed400448b59f4c71584a22ea28878295d6d87ff79342 I have updated the sis path for gdb-8.1, can be downloaded from: https://gaisler.org/gdb/gdb-8.1.sis.diff <https://gaisler.org/gdb/gdb-8.1.sis.diff> Thanks for the quick turnaround. What's the barrier to getting this merged?
The main problem is that the sis code style that does not correspond to the current gdb standards. Each patch required to change/rework original sis code to gdb conventions. Also the change log provided with the patches was deemed insufficient. It was rather pain-staking to merge the first ~20 pathes and took many iterations with the gdb/sparc maintainer. I also feel that the gdb maintainers would want us to use the built-in simulator infrastructure more, rather than having a custom simulator core in sis. I have been gathering strength to go for a couple of new rounds with the gdb folks and try to submit the remaining ~10 patches. A few of the patches are however rather large (leon2/3 support), and I am not very optimistic on when (if ever) they will be accepted. I will do my best ...
Jiri.
_______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@rtems.org http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
