From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Michael Snyder <msnyder@cygnus.com>
To: Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@mvista.com>
Cc: Andrew Cagney <ac131313@cygnus.com>, gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
Subject: Re: [RFC/RFA] gdb extension for Harvard architectures
Date: Wed, 03 Oct 2001 11:12:00 -0000
Message-id: <3BBB54C6.5392258C@cygnus.com>
References: <3BB4D843.A92818B9@cygnus.com> <3BB4E273.5020308@cygnus.com> <3BBB4D90.AE2B5AEE@cygnus.com> <20011003140639.A661@nevyn.them.org>
X-SW-Source: 2001-10/msg00053.html

Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
> 
> On Wed, Oct 03, 2001 at 10:40:32AM -0700, Michael Snyder wrote:
> > Andrew Cagney wrote:
> > >
> > > > + extern char *
> > > > + address_space_int_to_name (int space_flag)
> > > > + {
> > > > +   if (space_flag & TYPE_FLAG_CODE_SPACE)
> > > > +     return "code";
> > > > +   else if (space_flag & TYPE_FLAG_DATA_SPACE)
> > > > +     return "data";
> > > > +   else
> > > > +     return NULL;
> > > > + }
> > > > +
> > >
> > > Some thoughts on the internals.
> > >
> > > Should these spaces be flags or an enumeration?  I don't think being
> > > able to specify space = (CODE | DATA) is meanginful.  Haveing bit masks
> > > also puts a limitation on the number of spaces.
> >
> > Yes, but it's a generous limitation (there are 20 more bits available).
> > I'll go either way -- the trade-off is that if we don't use the "flags"
> > field, we have to add a new field to the (struct type) data structure.
> 
> May I suggest:
>         if ((space_flag & TYPE_FLAG_SPACE_MASK) == TYPE_FLAG_CODE_SPACE)
> 
> I'd prefer to preserve the knowledge that an object is in only one
> space.

Sure, good suggestion.