From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 12315 invoked by alias); 25 Sep 2008 22:20:52 -0000 Received: (qmail 12306 invoked by uid 22791); 25 Sep 2008 22:20:52 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from NaN.false.org (HELO nan.false.org) (208.75.86.248) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Thu, 25 Sep 2008 22:20:13 +0000 Received: from nan.false.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by nan.false.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C07C810CF0; Thu, 25 Sep 2008 22:20:10 +0000 (GMT) Received: from caradoc.them.org (22.svnf5.xdsl.nauticom.net [209.195.183.55]) by nan.false.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8F4E9104BB; Thu, 25 Sep 2008 22:20:10 +0000 (GMT) Received: from drow by caradoc.them.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1KizBx-0002EJ-LL; Thu, 25 Sep 2008 18:20:09 -0400 Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2008 22:20:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: Bart Veer Cc: Doug Evans , stan@codesourcery.com, gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: add file I/O support when debugging an embedded target via jtag Message-ID: <20080925222009.GA8202@caradoc.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: Bart Veer , Doug Evans , stan@codesourcery.com, gdb-patches@sourceware.org References: <48BAAC44.4000002@codesourcery.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2008-05-11) 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: 2008-09/txt/msg00507.txt.bz2 On Thu, Sep 25, 2008 at 09:26:30PM +0100, Bart Veer wrote: > Although I have no doubt that a Python interface at the target vector > level is possible, figuring out what such an interface should look > like requires a far greater understanding of the gdb internals than I > possess. I am pretty sure it would also involve much bigger changes to > the internals than a one-line addition to the stratum enum. I really > don't want to see the h/w debug I/O functionality to be delayed for a > long time, possibly years, until all the required infrastructure is in > place for a reimplementation in Python. This is a reasonable argument. Unfortunately the other direction is reasonable too: remember Stan's comment about adding new strata? That's got maintenance cost for the rest of GDB, because the strata aren't really meant to work this way. And it may get in the way of future development, e.g. the work that Stan and Pedro are doing to support multiple processes and multi-core systems. FWIW, I find your reason for putting it above process_stratum convincing but not your reason for putting it below thread_stratum. I don't see why it has to be in the target vector at all. -- Daniel Jacobowitz CodeSourcery