On Fri, Sep 17 2021, Mark Kettenis <mark.kettenis@xs4all.nl> wrote:
>> From: Jeremie Courreges-Anglas <jca@wxcvbn.org>
>> Date: Fri, 17 Sep 2021 13:23:58 +0200
>>
>> On Sat, Sep 04 2021, Jeremie Courreges-Anglas <jca@wxcvbn.org> wrote:
>> > On Fri, Sep 03 2021, Jeremie Courreges-Anglas <jca@wxcvbn.org> 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
No comments:
Post a Comment