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] |
> -----Original Message----- > From: Jan Kratochvil [mailto:jan.kratochvil@redhat.com] > Sent: Friday, February 01, 2013 3:18 PM > > The problem I have with "target record" is that the sub-commands are added in > > add_target, one per added target. Would it be OK to export targetlist so I can add > > an alias for target "record-full"? Or is it OK to just drop target "record"? > > OK, let's export targetlist, with some comment it should not be normally used. I added a new function add_deprecated_target_alias to do this. Patch attached. Please let me know if you'd rather want it inline in a separate email. > > On a similar matter, I renamed the existing "set/show record" subcommands by > > prepending "full-", i.e. "insn-number-max" becomes "full-insn-number-max". > > Could it be a prefix command? "set record full insn-number-max" etc. > > To match "record full" (vs. "record btrace"). Done. > There should be aliases with deprecate_cmd during such changes, deprecate_cmd > also ensures it does not get <tab>-completed anymore. When I use add_alias_cmd, I do not get the deprecated warning. Am I doing something wrong (patch attached)? > > For record-btrace and record-full, to_record_list will be quite different. For all > > other targets, it will be NULL. > > > > We could share to_disconnect, to_detach, to_kill, and to_mourn_inferior. They > > are just forwarding the request after unpushing the record target. > > > > I made the "record stop" command generic. It searches for a record target > > beneath the current and unpushes the first it finds. I could do something > > similar for the above. > > It looks OK to me, it would be better to see the code. Please find the patch attached. Please let me know if you want the patch inline in a separate email, instead. > > There's a record_changed notifier that is called in to_open and in the stop > > command. Why is it not called in to_close instead of in the stop command? > > to_close is a bit dangerous that the target is no longer on stack, as > documented in unpush_target. So maybe record_changed could want to do > something with the record traget yet. > > But with the currently only listener MI it should work even from to_close. We're not sending a notification every time we unpush the record target, e.g. on mourn_inferior or detach. I'm preserving the current behavior. Regards, Markus. Intel GmbH Dornacher Strasse 1 85622 Feldkirchen/Muenchen, Deutschland Sitz der Gesellschaft: Feldkirchen bei Muenchen Geschaeftsfuehrer: Christian Lamprechter, Hannes Schwaderer, Douglas Lusk Registergericht: Muenchen HRB 47456 Ust.-IdNr./VAT Registration No.: DE129385895 Citibank Frankfurt a.M. (BLZ 502 109 00) 600119052
Attachment:
add_deprecated_target_alias.patch
Description: add_deprecated_target_alias.patch
Attachment:
rename_record.patch
Description: rename_record.patch
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |