This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: should xfer_memory vector functions perform multiple transfers?
- To: jtc at redback dot com
- Subject: Re: should xfer_memory vector functions perform multiple transfers?
- From: Andrew Cagney <ac131313 at cygnus dot com>
- Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2001 13:40:11 -0800
- Cc: gdb at sourceware dot cygnus dot com
- References: <firstname.lastname@example.org>
"J.T. Conklin" wrote:
> In many (most? (all?)) cases, the xfer_memory vector functions will
> perform multiple transfers if the size of the transfer is too large
> to do in one. The high level logic in target_xfer_memory() will do
> the same.
(Ah, yes, that ...)
> Is there a rule about whether a too-large transfer should be split by
> xfer_memory vector functions or target_xfer_memory()? If it can be
> done by vector functions, the value of target_xfer_memory_partial()
> is limited. (target_xfer_memory_partial() is used (indirectly) in
> generic_load() so that GDB is not completely stalled during large
My strong preference is for the target_xfer() to just move as much data
as can be copied in a single atomic operation.