This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: [PATCH 5/5] set/show code-cache NEWS and doc
- From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz at gnu dot org>
- To: Yao Qi <yao at codesourcery dot com>
- Cc: gdb-patches at sourceware dot org
- Date: Sat, 02 Nov 2013 09:06:11 +0200
- Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/5] set/show code-cache NEWS and doc
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <1382516855-32218-1-git-send-email-yao at codesourcery dot com> <1382516855-32218-6-git-send-email-yao at codesourcery dot com> <83sivshuux dot fsf at gnu dot org> <5268D967 dot 2000703 at codesourcery dot com> <837gd2itkj dot fsf at gnu dot org> <526A3B07 dot 1020607 at codesourcery dot com> <83ob6dhdpt dot fsf at gnu dot org> <52744600 dot 9020205 at codesourcery dot com>
- Reply-to: Eli Zaretskii <eliz at gnu dot org>
> Date: Sat, 2 Nov 2013 08:23:28 +0800
> From: Yao Qi <email@example.com>
> CC: <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> On 10/25/2013 06:00 PM, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> >> How about "executable code"?
> > I would suggest "code section", unless you think that is incorrect for
> > some reason.
> GDB can also access code generated by JIT, but they are not from "code
> section". On the other hand, "read code section" usually means "read
> code section in executable file" rather than "read code section in live
I'm also OK with "code segment", if you think it's more accurate.
"Executable code" is too vague to be helpful, IMO.