From: Andrew Cagney <ac131313@redhat.com>
To: Richard.Earnshaw@arm.com
Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
Subject: Re: PATCH ARM add new set/show arm commands
Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2003 15:19:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <3E80738D.6050405@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200303251222.h2PCMqF08079@pc960.cambridge.arm.com>
>> > Are you suggesting I should change the option name to "set arm
>> > disassembler"? If so, I've no problem with that. If not, what are you
>
>>
>> Yes, just "set arm disassembler". Er, actually, is "set arm
>> disassembler-options" better? Either name is more in line with the
>> existing objdump --disassembler-options option.
>
>
> I'm not entirely happy with the idea of forcing this method to be
> identical to the objdump machinery. In particular, the current objdump
> flags available to gdb are all prefixed by reg-names- and in gdb this is
> not accepted by gdb.
>
> Further, there is another option in the arm disassembler-options command
> that is not available to gdb -- force-thumb. Something like this is
> needed for gdb, but not at this level. For gdb a proper flag that is
> visible to the rest of the debugger, not just the assembler is needed.
> Further, that flag needs to be a 3-state one, ARM, Thumb and auto.
> Forcing the state will affect things like breakpoint insertion etc.
>
> I think I'd rather keep the option as "set arm disassembler" to make these
> distinctions clear. Thoughts?
M'kay. Can you add a note to that effect to the bug report (the i386
needs a similar treatment).
Andrew
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2003-03-25 15:19 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2003-03-22 16:29 Richard Earnshaw
2003-03-22 22:20 ` Andrew Cagney
2003-03-24 9:48 ` Richard Earnshaw
2003-03-24 17:10 ` Andrew Cagney
2003-03-25 12:24 ` Richard Earnshaw
2003-03-25 15:19 ` Andrew Cagney [this message]
2003-03-25 15:37 ` Richard Earnshaw
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=3E80738D.6050405@redhat.com \
--to=ac131313@redhat.com \
--cc=Richard.Earnshaw@arm.com \
--cc=gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox