Mirror of the gdb-patches mailing list
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
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



  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