Re: new gdb remote packet type

[Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@false.org>]

On Wed, May 12, 2004 at 03:05:40PM -0400, Robert Picco wrote:
> On IA64 the g-packet is too large for kernel debugging.  How would you 
> suggest identifying registers that are in g-packet.  Use another 
> protocol extension to see whether target wants to exclude registers from 
> g-packet?  Another way would be to optionally enable the p-packet with a 
> "set-command".  This p-packet causes very little latency on IA64 because 
> most register values retrieved come from RSE (register stack engine) 
> backing store memory.

The latency I was worried about was round trip time - if we have to
request a half-dozen out of a hundred registers, then this will
probably take longer than a whole g packet would, because of waiting
for each side to process the conversation.  I guess we'll ignore it for
now and investigate smaller regsets later with qPart.

-- 
Daniel Jacobowitz