This is the mail archive of the gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com 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] |
(I've attached a few of comments that go with TARGET_OBJECT, check the archives for qPart)
For regsets, the ``void *buffer/long length'' pair can be replaced by a single ``byte array'' object.
The regset code can then send offset/length xfer requests to that ``byte array''. For cores, the byte array would extract the bytes from the core file; for ptrace, the byte array would extract the bytes using the relevant ptrace call; and for the remote inferior, the request would be converted into one or more qPart packets (sending the regset/offset/length across the wire).
When it comes to a `T' reply, the remote inferior can push regset/offset/length data for parts of the regset buffer that it thinks are interesting.
If I'm interpreting your answer right, it is: "don't do anything about it, change the remote protocol instead", right?
A more practical approach would probably be to maintain a mapping of the remote protocol register numbers to GDB's internal register numbers in addition to register sets. I don't see any problem with that.
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |