This is the mail archive of the gdb-patches@sourceware.org mailing list for the GDB project.
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |
Other format: | [Raw text] |
On 07/15/2013 12:34 PM, Andreas Arnez wrote:
Luis Machado <lgustavo@codesourcery.com> writes:I didn't go through your last update of the patch, but FTR i still think we should make the core file sections static and store them in some form of array instead of hardcoding their contents in numerous function calls.In the PowerPC case the patch includes four call-back invocations, all contained in a 20-line iterator function. I'd hardly call that "numerous function calls". And I consider it an improvement over the original code, which had six hard-coded static array initializers with various copy-/pasted lines, plus the logic for selecting the correct array. The improvement is even more drastic for S/390. Don't you agree? Or do you see even more potential for improvement?
What i don't see now is an obvious way of telling which register sets are available for core files in PowerPC. You'd have to infer that based on dynamic data.
It is my personal view on the change, really. I don't claim it is right or wrong.
Also, why is the PowerPC backend being modified together with S390? Is this a change to account for POWER8? The introductory mail does not mention anything PowerPC-specific.
Luis
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |