This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: Possible remote.c patch for Z-packet breakpoints + Harvard + SID
- To: Nick Duffek <nsd at redhat dot com>
- Subject: Re: Possible remote.c patch for Z-packet breakpoints + Harvard + SID
- From: Andrew Cagney <ac131313 at cygnus dot com>
- Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2001 16:47:20 -0400
- Cc: cagney at cygnus dot com, fche at redhat dot com,gdb-patches at sourceware dot cygnus dot com
- References: <3B547E19.2070201@cygnus.com> <200107171937.f6HJb4v24007@rtl.cygnus.com>
>>However, as a general rule, I think GDB should be consistent and always send
>>down down CORE_ADDR's.
>
>
> Meaning virtual CORE_ADDRs? I agree.
Yes.
> On 16-Jul-2001, Frank Ch . Eigler wrote:
>
>
>>If this gdb-side approach is not deemed acceptable to gdb folks, we
>>may be able to make complementary changes on the sid side without too
>>much littering.
>
>
> Do we have a consensus that a SID-side approach is preferable to a
> GDB-side one?
Looks like it (no one else has spoken up).
It means that GDB sends the remote target a CORE_ADDR and that the
remote target needs to provide a mechanism for mapping between the
hardware registers and a CORE_ADDR address. Not unlike
gdbarch->{read,write}_pc().
Andrew