From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gdb-patches-return-16910-listarch-gdb-patches=sourceware.cygnus.com@sources.redhat.com>
Received: (qmail 13128 invoked by alias); 14 Jul 2002 18:28:55 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gdb-patches-subscribe@sources.redhat.com>
List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/gdb-patches/>
List-Post: <mailto:gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com>
List-Help: <mailto:gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sources.redhat.com
Received: (qmail 13119 invoked from network); 14 Jul 2002 18:28:52 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO localhost.redhat.com) (24.112.240.27)
  by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 14 Jul 2002 18:28:52 -0000
Received: from ges.redhat.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by localhost.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 14C623DB7; Sun, 14 Jul 2002 14:28:48 -0400 (EDT)
Message-ID: <3D31C2DF.3000708@ges.redhat.com>
Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2002 17:53:00 -0000
From: Andrew Cagney <ac131313@ges.redhat.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; NetBSD macppc; en-US; rv:1.0.0) Gecko/20020708
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@mvista.com>
Cc: Johan Rydberg <jrydberg@rtmk.org>, gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] remote_rcmd
References: <20020627035114.M1899@cockmaster.bredbandsbolaget.se> <3D31A763.7020904@ges.redhat.com> <20020714173945.GB30061@nevyn.them.org> <3D31B976.5080700@ges.redhat.com> <20020714180035.GA31167@nevyn.them.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-SW-Source: 2002-07/txt/msg00313.txt.bz2

> On Sun, Jul 14, 2002 at 01:48:38PM -0400, Andrew Cagney wrote:
> 
>> >
>> >Actually, the current docs suggest:
>> >
>> >-> qRcmd command
>> ><- O <HEX-OUTPUT>
>> ><- O <HEX-OUTPUT>
>> ><- <HEX-OUTPUT>
>> ><- OK
> 
>> 
>> Where?
> 
> 
>                               COMMAND (hex encoded) is passed to the
>                               local interpreter for execution.  Invalid
>                               commands should be reported using the
>                               output string.  Before the final result
>                               packet, the target may also respond with
>                               number of intermediate `O'OUTPUT console
>                               output packets.

``before the final _result_ packet''

> ...
> 
>                reply OUTPUT   A command response with the hex encoded
>                               output string OUTPUT.

This is one of several ``_result_'' packets.

>> >which confuses me.  What's supposed to differentiate the O <HEX-OUTPUT>
>> >packets from the final <HEX-OUTPUT> packet (what difference in purpose,
>> >I mean)?
> 
>> 
>> Valid replies to ``qRcmd'' are:
>> 
>> 	``OK''
>> 	``''
>> 	``<HEX-OUTPUT>''
>> 	``Enn''
>> 
>> The ``O'' packet is something separate.
> 
> 
> I think I wasn't clear in my question.  qRcmd can send some O packets,
> which are supposed to provide some ambiguous form of "output" from the
> "console", and then one <HEX-OUTPUT> packet.  What is supposed to go in
> which?  It doesn't make sense to me to limit this to one <HEX-OUTPUT>
> packet if it is arbitrary output; it may simply be too large.  On the
> other hand I'm not sure I see why both O<HEX> and <HEX> are allowed.

Sorry, you've lost me.  There are a number of choices and which is used 
is left to the implementor.  Sequences like:

	<- O output
	<- O output
	<- OK
and
	<- O output
	<- output
and
	<- output
and
	<- OK

are all valid.  To be honest, I've only seen targets use the last two. 
Typically the command response is so small that it can be safely 
squeesed into a single reply packet.

Andrew