On Fri, Sep 17 2021, Mark Kettenis <[email protected]> wrote: >> From: Jeremie Courreges-Anglas <[email protected]> >> Date: Fri, 17 Sep 2021 13:23:58 +0200 >> >> On Sat, Sep 04 2021, Jeremie Courreges-Anglas <[email protected]> wrote: >> > On Fri, Sep 03 2021, Jeremie Courreges-Anglas <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> So here's the result of the torture I've been doing to my self during >> >> this hackathon. gdb-10.x inferior target support is broken for reasons >> >> I still ignore and I've been told that moving to 9.x was already nice >> >> enough. :) >> >> >> >> Regarding the changes below: >> >> - DEBUG_PACKAGES, reminded by sthen@ >> >> - disable mpfr, linking against libgmp.a breaks on powerpc with >> >> relocation errors >> >> - xxhash support added, just because it took me less time to just add >> >> the dep. I didn't actually check for all possible new hidden deps >> > >> > To keep things simple I just force-disabled everything that seemed >> > relevant. >> > >> >> - CFLAGS tweak maybe not needed any more? If this actually requires >> >> C11 or C++11 support, COMPILER should be changed >> > >> > The port now requires C++11 support and thus base-clang or ports-gcc >> > (tested on sparc64 with COMPILER=base-gcc). Both base-clang and >> > ports-gcc default to C17 so no need to specify -std=gnu11. >> > >> > So along with m88k this also kills egdb support on sh (no idea whether >> > it actually built/worked there, I only know that one file was patched). >> > I don't consider this as a showstopper. If people care about egdb on >> > those architectures it should be possible to add a devel/gdb-7 port. >> > >> >> - upstream moved file named <arch><system> to <arch>-<system> so I moved >> >> our files too, sorry for the churn. >> >> - I also had to adapt our aarch64 and powerpc64 support patches to the >> >> API changes that happened upstream >> >> - i386 needed special love, some changes that happened in there haven't >> >> been compile tested >> >> - the ptid_get_pid->get_ptrace_pid issue has been solved upstream, so >> >> a bunch of patches get removed >> >> - some of the configure.nat dedup changes aren't strictly needed but >> >> they just seem better in the long term. For example some of our >> >> architectures didn't use bsd-kvm.c/libkvm. >> >> - OpenBSD/riscv64 support files shamelessly copied from the FreeBSD >> >> support (thanks!). Besides mechanical renaming, I think it's the only >> >> relevant change I made there. riscv64 support means we can read >> >> coredumps and print backtraces. We can't do inferior process >> >> debugging yet because we just don't support PT_STEP (this may also be >> >> a problem on other architectures). We also need a kernel diff that >> >> I haven't sent yet. >> >> - m88k support has been removed, sorry aoyama@ :-/ >> >> - the python patch isn't needed anymore >> > >> > - added in the diff below: two hunks to keep building on OpenBSD/armv7, >> > I had lost those bits initially present in Pascal's update to 8.2.1. >> > >> >> Thanks to all the folks who helped me test a previous diff on various >> >> architectures! Even if there are still open questions (and I may have >> >> forgotten some so reviews would be welcome), I hope we can commit this >> >> update before tagging OpenBSD 7.0. Therefore I'll need another round of >> >> tests! >> >> >> >> Things to test with -current devel/gdb *and* after applying the diff >> >> below: >> >> - egdb -ex run <dynamic program> # for example du >> >> - egdb -ex run <static program> # for example ls >> > >> > More complete/automated tests: >> > - egdb -ex 'b main' -ex run -ex bt -ex continue -ex q >> > /usr/src/usr.bin/du/obj/du >> > - egdb -ex 'b main' -ex run -ex bt -ex continue -ex q >> > /usr/src/bin/ls/obj/ls >> > >> >> - reading a coredump and printing a backtrace >> >> - ? >> >> Updated diff after some tweaks and successful tests by jj@ on octeon. >> >> arch-specific test reports so far: >> - ok: amd64, riscv64, sparc64, i386, powerpc, powerpc64, octeon >> - not ok: arm64 (don't know how to run) >> - unknown: alpha, armv7, hppa, loongson >> - not applicable: sh, m88k >> >> Apart from the "unknown" architectures above, new tests on arm64 would >> be sweet. The support for native inferior target should be hooked up ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ >> now - but it may fail to build. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>> >> (gdb-9.2-8.diff) > > Not sure what I'm doing wrong, but for me arm64 doesn't even build... I would suspect errors compiling aarch64-obsd-nat.c, right? If you send me the error log I might be able to fix them. -- jca | PGP : 0x1524E7EE / 5135 92C1 AD36 5293 2BDF DDCC 0DFA 74AE 1524 E7EE
