From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 8167 invoked by alias); 3 Jun 2003 02:41:42 -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 8160 invoked from network); 3 Jun 2003 02:41:41 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO crack.them.org) (146.82.138.56) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 3 Jun 2003 02:41:41 -0000 Received: from dsl093-172-017.pit1.dsl.speakeasy.net ([66.93.172.17] helo=nevyn.them.org ident=mail) by crack.them.org with asmtp (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian)) id 19N1ki-0007ZF-00; Mon, 02 Jun 2003 21:42:20 -0500 Received: from drow by nevyn.them.org with local (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian)) id 19N1k2-00022U-00; Mon, 02 Jun 2003 22:41:38 -0400 Date: Tue, 03 Jun 2003 02:41:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: Andrew Cagney Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [patch rfc] Add frame memory & arch methods Message-ID: <20030603024137.GA7798@nevyn.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: Andrew Cagney , gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com References: <3EDBF301.2050001@redhat.com> <20030603012300.GB1150@nevyn.them.org> <3EDC08F9.10809@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <3EDC08F9.10809@redhat.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.1i X-SW-Source: 2003-06/txt/msg00114.txt.bz2 On Mon, Jun 02, 2003 at 10:33:29PM -0400, Andrew Cagney wrote: > >On Mon, Jun 02, 2003 at 08:59:45PM -0400, Andrew Cagney wrote: > > > >>Hello, > >> > >>This adds per-frame memory and architecture methods. Instead of using > >>the global variablecurrent_gdbarch and the context dependant > >>read_memory, architecture code can use these. Should help future proof > >>architecture code should thread/target changes start happening. > >> > >>It uses them in the d10v. > >> > >>I'll commit in a few days. > > > > > >Could you explain to us where you see this going? Right now it looks > >like a solution without a problem. Sure, someday they may need a > >target parameter, but until we're closer to that day I don't see why a > >frame parameter is the way to go. > > Ref: [multi-arch] The frame as the global parameter (long, important), > http://sources.redhat.com/ml/gdb/2001-02/msg00335.html Very enlightening, thank you! [To paraphrase you, it sure must be gratifying to see how much of that message looks "obvious" now, two years later.] -- Daniel Jacobowitz MontaVista Software Debian GNU/Linux Developer