From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 22920 invoked by alias); 28 Sep 2012 08:25:08 -0000 Received: (qmail 22902 invoked by uid 22791); 28 Sep 2012 08:25:05 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-4.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,KHOP_THREADED,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_NO,SPF_SOFTFAIL X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mtaout22.012.net.il (HELO mtaout22.012.net.il) (80.179.55.172) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Fri, 28 Sep 2012 08:24:59 +0000 Received: from conversion-daemon.a-mtaout22.012.net.il by a-mtaout22.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) id <0MB100K00WLSPR00@a-mtaout22.012.net.il> for gdb-patches@sourceware.org; Fri, 28 Sep 2012 10:24:57 +0200 (IST) Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 ([87.69.4.28]) by a-mtaout22.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) with ESMTPA id <0MB100K6VWPLF7F0@a-mtaout22.012.net.il>; Fri, 28 Sep 2012 10:24:57 +0200 (IST) Date: Fri, 28 Sep 2012 08:25:00 -0000 From: Eli Zaretskii Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] new memory-changed MI notification. In-reply-to: <50655887.2090406@codesourcery.com> To: Yao Qi Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Reply-to: Eli Zaretskii Message-id: <83626yh7vo.fsf@gnu.org> References: <1348793347-12556-1-git-send-email-yao@codesourcery.com> <1348793347-12556-2-git-send-email-yao@codesourcery.com> <83bogqha4t.fsf@gnu.org> <50655887.2090406@codesourcery.com> 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: 2012-09/txt/msg00671.txt.bz2 > Date: Fri, 28 Sep 2012 15:57:59 +0800 > From: Yao Qi > CC: > > On 09/28/2012 03:36 PM, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > > If @var{type} can only be "code", then I suggest to say > > > > ...[,type=code] > > > > explicitly. > > > > @var{type} can only "code" nowadays, but I am wondering we may have > other types, such as "data", in the future. I don't want to give the > consumer of this notification an impression that "type=code" is > hard-coded into notification. If we don't have to worry about it at > all, "[,type=code]" is fine to me. We don't have to worry about this at this time. The explanatory text says that type can only be "code" anyway, and will have to be revised when other types can be emitted. So not saying 'code" saves us nothing. > > Btw, why "code"? If this is the name of the section, it should be > > ".text", not code. > > From the consumer of this notification's point of view, 'type' is more > useful than 'name', because the consumer may don't know what ".text" > section is, or on some ports, text section is not named as ".text", such > as section ".text_vle" for VLE. In that case, saying that this identifies a section is inaccurate. But if we are going to put "code" explicitly in the notification line, then this is perhaps a moot point. The explanatory text should say something like The optional @code{type="code"} part is reported if the memory written to holds executable code.