harvard architectures - the d10v

[Doug Evans]

Andrew Cagney writes:
 > So a meta question, how should GDB behave when it comes to a harvard
 > architecture?

Is "Harvard Architecture" really the best name for this?
Seems to me it includes only a small subset of the total set of
architectures that have multiple address spaces for different uses.

 > I've this feeling that at present we've lots of people all trying to get
 > GDB to work on harvard architectures and each, in a vacuum, is
 > determining how it should behave.  The unfortunately consequence is that
 > when the discussion is finally dragged, kicking and screaming, out onto
 > a public forum, no one agrees.  People refuse to discuss details because
 > their harvard architecture is all hush, hush.  By the time the issues
 > are raised, it is all too late and the real problems are simply not
 > fixed.

At best, this is a wee bit presumptious.
[but never let that stop a good argument :-)]

 > The ironic part to all this is that, long ago, GDB was targeted at the
 > d10v (it is the extreme games version of a harvard architectures). At
 > the time it was decided that the d10v hacks should to be accepted into
 > gdb because that way there was at least a working implementation out
 > there in a public forum.  The tool you all need to facilitate public
 > discussion are available yet everyone refuses to use it!

Define "everyone".
Define "refuses".

 > ``But the d10v is a hack''?  So?  The point of the d10v, wasn't to
 > provide a reference implementation (anything but!) but rather to provide
 > a vehicle through which a reference implementation could be developed. 

I don't know that the d10v was all the good a reference implementation
or that one is even needed for the task at hand.

 > So, who out of all of you would like to steer this to resolution?  The
 > first thing I think needs to be done is for people to agree to the
 > correct interaction and document it.  That way if people ever want to
 > re-open the debate about what the behaviour should be they can simply
 > turn to the gdb.texinfo documentation.

I'm not in a position to steer anything gdb-wise.
But I do have an interest in seeing this resolved.