From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gdb-patches-return-77495-listarch-gdb-patches=sources.redhat.com@sourceware.org>
Received: (qmail 12119 invoked by alias); 8 Jan 2011 03:34:31 -0000
Received: (qmail 11775 invoked by uid 22791); 8 Jan 2011 03:34:30 -0000
X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.9 required=5.0	tests=AWL,BAYES_00,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD
X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Received: from mail.codesourcery.com (HELO mail.codesourcery.com) (38.113.113.100)    by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Sat, 08 Jan 2011 03:34:25 +0000
Received: (qmail 20965 invoked from network); 8 Jan 2011 03:34:22 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO ?192.168.0.102?) (yao@127.0.0.2)  by mail.codesourcery.com with ESMTPA; 8 Jan 2011 03:34:22 -0000
Message-ID: <4D27DB30.4080603@codesourcery.com>
Date: Sat, 08 Jan 2011 03:34:00 -0000
From: Yao Qi <yao@codesourcery.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.9.2.13) Gecko/20101208 Thunderbird/3.1.7
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Doug Evans <dje@google.com>, Stan Shebs <stan@codesourcery.com>
CC: "gdb-patches@sourceware.org" <gdb-patches@sourceware.org>
Subject: Re: duplicated code in gdb and gdbserver
References: <4D272FF6.3070402@codesourcery.com> <AANLkTinMZ6hchkv1h+H265Eu7+Zsb4GizJ2XA5-VUnEO@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTinMZ6hchkv1h+H265Eu7+Zsb4GizJ2XA5-VUnEO@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-IsSubscribed: yes
Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gdb-patches.sourceware.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gdb-patches-subscribe@sourceware.org>
List-Archive: <http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/>
List-Post: <mailto:gdb-patches@sourceware.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org
X-SW-Source: 2011-01/txt/msg00163.txt.bz2

On 01/08/2011 12:37 AM, Doug Evans wrote:
> Another example is individual target support.  E.g., merging common
> bits of gdb's ${target}-nat.c files with gdbserver's ${target}-low.c
> files.

On 01/08/2011 01:17 AM, Stan Shebs wrote:
 > One thing that we could be doing in addition to moving code is to
 > scrutinize gdb/*-nat.c and friends, and abstract out some API for any
 > in-GDB-itself assumptions.  Hopefully that will help to minimize the
 > need for #ifdef GDBSERVER hacks as we refactor the code.

Doug and Stan,
Thanks for your pointers and suggestions.  Looks like it is not a small 
piece of work, and IMO, merging common parts of gdb's ${target}-nat.c 
and gdbserver's ${target}-low.c can be a starting point.  I'll write 
patches for this.

-- 
Yao Qi