Re: [rfc/rfa] [4/4] SPU enhancements: GDB/MI extensions

["Ulrich Weigand" <uweigand@de.ibm.com>]

Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 05, 2007 at 12:59:20AM +0200, Ulrich Weigand wrote:
> > Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
> > 
> > > Right, but I didn't mean something quite that ambitious.  What does
> > > the IDE end up doing with the output of these commands, and does it
> > > want to parse them or just display them as text?
> > 
> > It certainly parses the information for display; for example, the
> > -spu-info-dma command results in output like (added whitespace for
> > better readability):
> > 
> > (gdb)
> > -spu-info-dma
> > ^done,SPUInfoDMA=
> > {
> >   dma_info_type="0x0",
> >   dma_info_mask="0x20",
> >   dma_info_status="0x0",
> 
> OK.  One way we could display this would be as a "struct" and with a
> varobj.
> 
> I can't really explain why I think target-specific MI commands are a
> bad idea.  Maybe they aren't; I'd love to hear other people's
> opinions.  I worry a bit about GDB/MI diverging between targets.
> 
> > It would appear that this makes sense only if the IDE is capable of
> > generically displaying any such -arch-info output.  This is a bit
> > different from our current -spu-info implementation where the IDE
> > has its own understanding of each of the various commands, and how
> > to best display the result of each of them.
> 
> Not necessarily.  I hope it would make sense if the IDE is capable of
> generic display, even if it is also capable of more specific display.
> Or it may just be a horrible idea.

I'd like to get Ricardo Matinata, our Cell/B.E. IDE team lead, involved
in this discussion, to make sure the format will be useful to them.

Ricardo, what are your thoughts on a generic -arch-info command as
suggested by Dan?  How would this need to look like to allow you
to present the "info spu" information in the same way (or at least
with the same ease-of-use) to the user?

Bye,
Ulrich

-- 
  Dr. Ulrich Weigand
  GNU Toolchain for Linux on System z and Cell BE
  Ulrich.Weigand@de.ibm.com