From: Mark Kettenis <kettenis@wins.uva.nl>
To: eliz@is.elta.co.il
Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
Subject: Re: [RFA]: New function to supply only one x87 register
Date: Fri, 09 Feb 2001 08:55:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <200102091655.f19GtFK06000@debye.wins.uva.nl> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200102091459.JAA00914@indy.delorie.com>
Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2001 09:59:15 -0500 (EST)
From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@delorie.com>
> From: Mark Kettenis <kettenis@wins.uva.nl>
> Date: 09 Feb 2001 14:47:25 +0100
I don't know enough about GDB's register cache to feel safe with such
assumptions. What I'm trying to do is be consistent with the
documented API. Since target.h's `to_fetch_registers' method says
"fetch register REGNO, or all regs if regno == -1", I'm trying to do
just that and nothing else.
Isn't it dangerous to have functions in the infrastructure with
built-in implicit assumptions that are not documented anywhere, and
only hold because the current application-level code does what it
does?
Of course it is, but in this particular case it is wide-spread. All
systems with a SVR4-like /proc file system do this, as well as most
systems that have a ptrace request that fetches a whole bunch of
registers in one go. By supplying all those registers at once, the
cache becomes some sort of read-ahead cache. This makes sense since
GDB hardly ever needs only one register, and pre-fetching those saves
a few system calls. This probably doesn't matter much on go32, but I
think you should do it anyway, at least for the FPU.
We probably should document this somewhere.
Mark
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2001-02-09 8:55 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2001-02-08 10:28 Eli Zaretskii
2001-02-09 5:47 ` Mark Kettenis
2001-02-09 6:59 ` Eli Zaretskii
2001-02-09 8:55 ` Mark Kettenis [this message]
2001-02-10 3:42 ` Eli Zaretskii
2001-02-10 14:59 ` Mark Kettenis
2001-02-16 9:33 ` Andrew Cagney
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=200102091655.f19GtFK06000@debye.wins.uva.nl \
--to=kettenis@wins.uva.nl \
--cc=eliz@is.elta.co.il \
--cc=gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox