From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 20214 invoked by alias); 22 May 2003 18:19:40 -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 20203 invoked from network); 22 May 2003 18:19:39 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO crack.them.org) (146.82.138.56) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 22 May 2003 18:19:39 -0000 Received: from nevyn.them.org ([66.93.61.169] ident=mail) by crack.them.org with asmtp (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian)) id 19Iufg-0002Pr-00; Thu, 22 May 2003 13:20:08 -0500 Received: from drow by nevyn.them.org with local (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian)) id 19Iuf6-00087r-00; Thu, 22 May 2003 14:19:32 -0400 Date: Thu, 22 May 2003 18:19:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: Kevin Buettner Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [RFA] Limited DW_OP_piece support Message-ID: <20030522181932.GA31074@nevyn.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: Kevin Buettner , gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com References: <1030522170039.ZM30271@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1030522170039.ZM30271@localhost.localdomain> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.1i X-SW-Source: 2003-05/txt/msg00431.txt.bz2 On Thu, May 22, 2003 at 10:00:39AM -0700, Kevin Buettner wrote: > The patch below adds limited DW_OP_piece support to dwarf2expr.c. I > will post a patch to rs6000-tdep.c which illustrates what a > ``dwarf2_compose_register_pieces'' method should look like. > > Okay? I would really strongly prefer that we not do it this way. You'll notice that there are no other gdbarch calls in the expression evaluator. There might be some implicit ones through macros, for instance there is TARGET_ADDR_BIT. That needs to be fixed properly some day already. Instead, IMHO, we should devise a way to represent multiple locations in the evaluator's return value. This is not suggesting the complete overhaul that we need to support multiple locations in the rest of GDB. Then have the expression evaluator properly return a list of locations, and have the massaging done via gdbarch in the evaluator's client. Does that sound reasonable? Maybe a flag to the evaluator which says whether we're looking for a location, for better sanity checking. Not sure about that part. -- Daniel Jacobowitz MontaVista Software Debian GNU/Linux Developer