From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 8215 invoked by alias); 29 Jan 2010 09:00:20 -0000 Received: (qmail 8198 invoked by uid 22791); 29 Jan 2010 09:00:18 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SPF_SOFTFAIL X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mtaout23.012.net.il (HELO mtaout23.012.net.il) (80.179.55.175) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Fri, 29 Jan 2010 09:00:13 +0000 Received: from conversion-daemon.a-mtaout23.012.net.il by a-mtaout23.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) id <0KX000B003BJVE00@a-mtaout23.012.net.il> for gdb-patches@sourceware.org; Fri, 29 Jan 2010 10:59:39 +0200 (IST) Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 ([77.127.180.161]) by a-mtaout23.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) with ESMTPA id <0KX000BII3NE4I50@a-mtaout23.012.net.il>; Fri, 29 Jan 2010 10:59:39 +0200 (IST) Date: Fri, 29 Jan 2010 09:00:00 -0000 From: Eli Zaretskii Subject: Re: [RFA/doc] Redefine the length argument in remote Z packets In-reply-to: <20100128222940.GE2813@caradoc.them.org> To: Daniel Jacobowitz Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Reply-to: Eli Zaretskii Message-id: <831vh9thfo.fsf@gnu.org> References: <20100128222940.GE2813@caradoc.them.org> X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2010-01/txt/msg00637.txt.bz2 > Date: Thu, 28 Jan 2010 17:29:41 -0500 > From: Daniel Jacobowitz > Cc: Eli Zaretskii > > I had two options for the new breakpoint. We could either send > Z0,ADDR,2 and have the target figure out whether to use the 16-bit or > 32-bit breakpoint, or we could send Z0,ADDR,3 [number chosen > arbitrarily] and have the target decide based on that to use a > 32-bit breakpoint. Wouldn't it be better to introduce a new packet, say Z32 or some such? > @@ -28867,7 +28867,8 @@ for an error > @cindex @samp{Z} packets > Insert (@samp{Z}) or remove (@samp{z}) a @var{type} breakpoint or > watchpoint starting at address @var{address} and covering the next > -@var{length} bytes. > +@var{length} bytes. @var{length} may also be a @var{kind} value > +for breakpoint packets. > > Each breakpoint and watchpoint packet @var{type} is documented > separately. > @@ -28879,18 +28880,21 @@ remote target shall support either both > avoid potential problems with duplicate packets, the operations should > be implemented in an idempotent way.} > > -@item z0,@var{addr},@var{length} > -@itemx Z0,@var{addr},@var{length} > +@item z0,@var{addr},@var{kind} > +@itemx Z0,@var{addr},@var{kind} You sometimes say that the 2nd arg is a size (but call it "kind") and sometimes that it's a kind or type. The above 2 instances are a typical example. This is inconsistent and eventually confusing. I suggest to use "kind" throughout. > Insert (@samp{Z1}) or remove (@samp{z1}) a hardware breakpoint at > -address @var{addr} of size @var{length}. > +address @var{addr} of size @var{kind}. This is one place where it's confusing. Otherwise, this is fine with me.