From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 8936 invoked by alias); 12 Apr 2006 12:57:17 -0000 Received: (qmail 8928 invoked by uid 22791); 12 Apr 2006 12:57:17 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from nevyn.them.org (HELO nevyn.them.org) (66.93.172.17) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31.1) with ESMTP; Wed, 12 Apr 2006 12:57:15 +0000 Received: from drow by nevyn.them.org with local (Exim 4.54) id 1FTeuH-0005mU-2Y; Wed, 12 Apr 2006 08:57:13 -0400 Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2006 12:57:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: Mark Kettenis Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: Save the length of inserted breakpoints Message-ID: <20060412125712.GA22145@nevyn.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: Mark Kettenis , gdb-patches@sourceware.org References: <20060302221711.GB18830@nevyn.them.org> <200603022301.k22N1qEt008208@elgar.sibelius.xs4all.nl> <20060411214613.GA702@nevyn.them.org> <200604120943.k3C9hYJ8012016@elgar.sibelius.xs4all.nl> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200604120943.k3C9hYJ8012016@elgar.sibelius.xs4all.nl> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.8i X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2006-04/txt/msg00148.txt.bz2 On Wed, Apr 12, 2006 at 11:43:34AM +0200, Mark Kettenis wrote: > I'm very sorry Daniel, but I think this is a bad idea. Passing down > struct bp_location makes the interface between the low-level tdep code > and the high-level breakpoint code much less clear. The low-level > code really should not know about the details of the breakpoint > implementation because people will be tempted to abuse it. And > changing the breakpoint interface will become a pain because suddenly > we will need to change all targets as well. Do you have a suggestion, then? I need some guidance; I've tried several versions of this patch and you haven't liked them. Would a new "struct bp_target_info", defined and allocated centrally for convenience, allay this concern? [Conveniently I can do the bulk of the changes for that with sed :-)] I'd prefer to define and allocate it centrally, rather than completely per-target, since the requirements of targets seem to be so similar. -- Daniel Jacobowitz CodeSourcery