From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Michael Snyder <msnyder@cygnus.com>
To: Andrew Cagney <ac131313@cygnus.com>
Cc: Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@mvista.com>, gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
Subject: Re: [RFC/RFA] gdb extension for Harvard architectures
Date: Wed, 03 Oct 2001 11:49:00 -0000
Message-id: <3BBB5D71.1D8B51B2@cygnus.com>
References: <3BB4D843.A92818B9@cygnus.com> <3BB4E273.5020308@cygnus.com> <3BBB4D90.AE2B5AEE@cygnus.com> <20011003140639.A661@nevyn.them.org> <3BBB54C6.5392258C@cygnus.com> <3BBB56AB.4090801@cygnus.com>
X-SW-Source: 2001-10/msg00055.html

Andrew Cagney wrote:
> 
> >  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.
> 
> Remember, the number of spaces is determined by the target architecture.
>   You can probably reserve a fixed set but it may eventually overflow.

And as you observed (I think), it would eventually be desireable 
to give the target arch the ability to define the spaces.
My hardwiring of "code" and "data" is just an initial step.
When we make it extendable, the internal implementation may be
entirely different, and the artificial limit on the number of
address spaces may go away.