Re: [PATCH v4 2/2] LAM: Enable tagged pointer support for watchpoints.

[Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>]

> From: "Schimpe, Christina" <christina.schimpe@intel.com>
> CC: "gdb-patches@sourceware.org" <gdb-patches@sourceware.org>, "Willgerodt,
>  Felix" <felix.willgerodt@intel.com>, "luis.machado@arm.com"
> 	<luis.machado@arm.com>
> Date: Mon, 8 Jul 2024 14:25:50 +0000
> 
> I understand that the NEWS text seems rather short, especially compared
> to my commit message.
> One reason why I kept the NEWS generic (without LAM and its specifics) is
> because theoretically the patch should work for AMD's tagged pointer support, too. 
> They call their tagged pointer support "upper address ignore" (UAI).
> 
> However, I still could mention LAM in that way in the NEWS:  
> 
> - GDB now supports watchpoints for tagged data pointers on amd64,
>  e.g. as provided by Intel's linear address masking (LAM) feature.
> 
> or 
> 
> - GDB now supports watchpoints for tagged data pointers on amd64. 
> For more information on tagged data pointers, see
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tagged_pointer.
> 
> Although given that I did not test UAI and don't know about its current
> state, I think it's better to use my first suggestion.

I think we can do both:

  GDB now supports watchpoints for tagged data pointers (see
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tagged_pointer) on amd64, such as the
  one used by the Linear Address Masking (LAM) feature provided by
  Intel.

> If you don't like my current suggestion, I have no problem adding a
> proper documentation on tagged pointers in the manual or adding
> more info to the NEWS. 

An informative enough NEWS entry should be fine in this case, I think.

Thanks.