Re: [PATCH/RFC] Per-architecture DWARF CFI register state initialization hooks

[Mark Kettenis <kettenis@chello.nl>]

   Date: Sat, 07 Feb 2004 18:48:47 -0500
   From: Andrew Cagney <cagney@gnu.org>

   > Here's my proposal for the per-architecture DWARF CFI register state
   > initialization hooks needed for S/390, and others.  This is a RFC,
   > since I'm not entirely confident whether my approach is acceptable.  I
   > chose to implement this using per-architecture data instead of adding
   > a function to the architecture vector.  I think it is cleaner since it
   > keeps things localized and modular, and the architecture vector is big
   > enough as it stands.

   Yes.  Technical nit though - I think it is still better to have a local 
   data struct and store the value in there.

I'm not sure what your idea is here.  Is it that you want me to use a
data structure that would be allocated by the dwarf2-frame.c module
such that I'd only need a single per-arch data key for the entire
dwarf2-frame.c module?  Or do you want the architecture to allocate
and initialize the structure?  The latter would mean more work for the
architecture; if you want to override a single member of the structure
you'd have to fill in all the details.  I don't really like that.

   From: Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@mvista.com>
   Date: Sat, 7 Feb 2004 18:03:30 -0500

   Hmm, I do.  You're adding a per-architecture data item which is a
   function pointer, and what amounts to the rest of what gdbarch.sh would
   generate (wrapper functions, default initialization.  I'd rather you
   just used gdbarch.sh.


What about Daniels objections that I'm hand-coding much what
gdbarch.sh already does?  I'm feeling that the modularity is worth it,
but how do you feel about that?

Mark