From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 26331 invoked by alias); 5 Dec 2006 21:16:19 -0000 Received: (qmail 26321 invoked by uid 22791); 5 Dec 2006 21:16:19 -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; Tue, 05 Dec 2006 21:16:09 +0000 Received: from drow by nevyn.them.org with local (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1Grhe3-0007RS-CV; Tue, 05 Dec 2006 16:16:07 -0500 Date: Tue, 05 Dec 2006 21:16:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: Vladimir Prus Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: variable objects and registers Message-ID: <20061205211607.GB28333@nevyn.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: Vladimir Prus , gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com References: <200611292020.47109.vladimir@codesourcery.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200611292020.47109.vladimir@codesourcery.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11) X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2006-12/txt/msg00043.txt.bz2 On Wed, Nov 29, 2006 at 08:20:47PM +0300, Vladimir Prus wrote: > > I was working on implementing a new MI command that creates variable objects > for registers, and I have something working good enough to discuss. This > patch lacks docs, but I wanted to make sure the interface is fine with > everybody before documenting it. No one else had any comments, and it looks fine to me. The patch looks OK too. It'll want a testcase, naturally. > As soon as we add the code to display memory-mapped registers, there will be a > problem that existing frontends might wish to show the memory-mapped > registers, but not wish (at the moment) to modify the code for displaying > regular registers. I plan to address this by either adding new > attribute "register-kind" to the output, that can be either "core" > or "memory-mapped", or by adding an option to -var-registers that says what > registers to show. But that's for future. Or a different command to return just those? I'm not sure they should be part of -var-registers; clients probably expect "registers" to be "the things that should go in a registers view", which won't include most MMIO registers. -- Daniel Jacobowitz CodeSourcery