From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 32577 invoked by alias); 28 Feb 2003 15:25:13 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 32568 invoked from network); 28 Feb 2003 15:25:12 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO crack.them.org) (65.125.64.184) by 172.16.49.205 with SMTP; 28 Feb 2003 15:25:12 -0000 Received: from nevyn.them.org ([66.93.61.169] ident=mail) by crack.them.org with asmtp (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian)) id 18ooH4-00065U-00; Fri, 28 Feb 2003 11:26:19 -0600 Received: from drow by nevyn.them.org with local (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian)) id 18omNl-000637-00; Fri, 28 Feb 2003 10:25:05 -0500 Date: Fri, 28 Feb 2003 15:25:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Cc: Andrew Cagney Subject: Re: [RFA]: File-I/O patch, Documentation Message-ID: <20030228152504.GC23109@nevyn.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com, Andrew Cagney References: <20021121100443.U24928@cygbert.vinschen.de> <3E5D4C4C.1040502@redhat.com> <20030227083701.GE20955@cygbert.vinschen.de> <3E5E9A1A.9000708@redhat.com> <20030228083308.GG24097@cygbert.vinschen.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20030228083308.GG24097@cygbert.vinschen.de> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.1i X-SW-Source: 2003-02/txt/msg00809.txt.bz2 On Fri, Feb 28, 2003 at 09:33:08AM +0100, Corinna Vinschen wrote: > > c99 (what ever the standard) formalized a number of explicitly sized > > types (int32 et.al. I believe). I think this table should be specified > > using those types. The alternative is to generalize the > > sim/common/sim-types.h file and then specify the sizes using that. > > I don't think so. The protocol is more or less self-contained. All > definitions are based on the assumption, that you'll never find a > really matching combination of values as they are defined on all > machines. Looking into the fileio code you'll see, that gdb has a > couple of functions which transform all protocol datatypes to host > datatypes and all protocol values to host values and vice versa. > This is done that way to be totally independent from other sources of > definition (especially machine dependent definitions). > > It's *expected* that the gdb plugin on the target side is doing the > same. Sure. But how big are they on the wire? I think that's what Andrew was asking to be clarified. -- Daniel Jacobowitz MontaVista Software Debian GNU/Linux Developer