From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 17588 invoked by alias); 14 Nov 2005 06:43:01 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 17566 invoked by uid 22791); 14 Nov 2005 06:42:59 -0000 Received: from zproxy.gmail.com (HELO zproxy.gmail.com) (64.233.162.194) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.30-dev) with ESMTP; Mon, 14 Nov 2005 06:42:59 +0000 Received: by zproxy.gmail.com with SMTP id l1so1227698nzf for ; Sun, 13 Nov 2005 22:42:56 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.37.2.48 with SMTP id e48mr3874680nzi; Sun, 13 Nov 2005 22:42:56 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.37.2.35 with HTTP; Sun, 13 Nov 2005 22:42:55 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <8f2776cb0511132242x79de71e9y269de9a493576eb2@mail.gmail.com> Date: Mon, 14 Nov 2005 15:57:00 -0000 From: Jim Blandy To: Randolph Chung , Jim Blandy , gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [RFA/RFC] Support DW_OP_breg for tracepoints In-Reply-To: <20051114022745.GA10422@nevyn.them.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline References: <43775DDB.6020408@tausq.org> <8f2776cb0511131539j17ae5144n87b1aedab1fa420e@mail.gmail.com> <4377D0CB.2010304@tausq.org> <20051114022745.GA10422@nevyn.them.org> X-SW-Source: 2005-11/txt/msg00187.txt.bz2 On 11/13/05, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote: > > >This code should go in ax-gdb.[ch]. That has a translator from GDB > > >expressions to agent expressions; it would make sense to also have a > > >translator from Dwarf expressions to agent expressions. > > Why is it any more logical to have dwarf code in ax-gdb.c than to have > agent code in dwarf2loc.c? In any case, it is a method of the symbol. > Please see struct symbol_ops. Yes, I'm not suggesting that we move locexpr_tracepoint_var_ref or loclist_tracepoint_var_ref. ax-general.c and ax.h are supposed to be very GDB-independent, and depend only on the definition of the agent expression bytecode language for their correctness. Everyplace else in GDB is supposed to be as ignorant as possible of the details of agent expressions.=20 ax-gdb.c is supposed to be the meeting place where we handle the GDB expression / agent expression relationship. dwarf2_tracepoint_var_ref is a similar situation: it is where Dwarf expressions and agent expressions meet. Other Dwarf code should stay independent of the details of agent expressions, and other agent code should stay independent of Dwarf. So maybe there should be a file parallel to ax-gdb.c called ax-dwarf.c; but that seems like overkill.=20 My thought was to make ax-gdb.c the overall rendezvous where we get down and dirty about the correspondence between agent expression semantics and other little languages' semantics.