Re: [gdbserver/patch] Z packet support

[Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@false.org>]

On Sun, Jan 30, 2005 at 10:57:17AM -0500, Paul Schlie wrote:
> >   2. Please re-read the comment; it should not be void *.  It is also
> >      required that it be harmless for CORE_ADDR to be too large; see
> >      MIPS n32 vs n64.
> [ Regarding: And while at it, move CORE_ADDR tweak server.h to wherever
>   it likely belongs? (and/or redefine it to void* if more appropriate)? ]
> 
> - sorry, it simply seemed implied by your own comment on the subject:
> 
>   "CORE_ADDR is always a long long in gdbserver, so your sizeof (addr)
>    probably doesn't work right for 32-bit targets.  I guess sizeof
>    (void *) is always right for this, though... at least for the kinds
>    of targets gdbserver supports now."
> 
>   combined with it's own FIXME comment:
> 
>   /* FIXME: This should probably be autoconf'd for.  It's an integer type
>    at least the size of a (void *).  */
>   typedef long long CORE_ADDR;

See the second sentence? :-)  It has to be an integer type, which void
* is not.  CORE_ADDR has to be at least as large as a target address.

When talking back to GDB, we should endeavour to use the actual size of
a target address, because sometimes 32-bit GDBs will get annoyed when
they receive 64-bit numbers.

> >   3. There are nowhere near enough exported functions to justify
> >      proliferating headers.
> 
> - sorry, guess I always considered "proliferating headers" as required
>   a superior alternative to the maintenance problems which proliferating
>   redundant declarations otherwise creates.

I guess I don't understand you.  In what way are these declarations
"redundant"?

-- 
Daniel Jacobowitz