From: Daniel Gutson <daniel.gutson@tallertechnologies.com>
To: Doug Evans <dje@google.com>
Cc: Yao Qi <yao@codesourcery.com>, gdb-patches <gdb-patches@sourceware.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix alignment of disassemble /r
Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2014 17:27:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAF5HaEUjLYqQdgvrwEdUKBJFFeCaaZ8BQQQTSJz1RMo_VEJdUA@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CADPb22Qii2QiTZxv6-cz0zWTVOcft_nf1+Lb0rgg2c3Qyq07Og@mail.gmail.com>
On Thu, Apr 17, 2014 at 1:27 PM, Doug Evans <dje@google.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 17, 2014 at 7:37 AM, Daniel Gutson
> <daniel.gutson@tallertechnologies.com> wrote:
>> So what if I add a new configuration variable, such as
>> set disassemble-raw-alignment
>> with "off" as default, and if set to on, pad to gdbarch_max_insn_length ?
>
> Presumably some frontends will do their own alignment.
>
> If we went with disassemble-raw-alignment, a boolean value won't help
> x86 much, it's either no alignment or (in general) too much
> whitespace.
> An improvement would be a value from min-insn-length to
> max-insn-length, but that would be problematic in a multi-arch
> debugging scenario.
>
> If we could agree on some minimum alignment for each variable-length
> ISA (5 would be fine for me for x86) then maybe a boolean value could
> be useful ("off" = no alignment, "on" = employ arch-specific minimum).
>
> OTOH, what if we made two passes over the instructions, with the first
> pass computing the maximum instruction length that is present?
I already considered this, but thought that it would be going to be
rejected due to be too much non-performant. Wouldn't each pass
translate in a lot of MI messaging in a case of a remote server? And,
what about screen paginig? I shouldn't iterate over all the range, but
the screen height range only.
I can go for any of the proposed solutions. 5 insn-length was fine for
me. On a side note, I did this since I was debugging some
self-modifying-code where the mis-alignment was driving me crazy.
The two-passes solution is the one I dislike more IMVHO.
Yet another option is to set the disassembly raw alignment width, something like
set disassemble-raw-width 5
(5 is the amount of insn; 0 means no padding equal to the current
behavior and that would be the default value).
Daniel.
> [And maybe only doing this for CLI.]
--
Daniel F. Gutson
Chief Engineering Officer, SPD
San Lorenzo 47, 3rd Floor, Office 5
Córdoba, Argentina
Phone: +54 351 4217888 / +54 351 4218211
Skype: dgutson
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-04-17 17:27 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-04-11 22:24 Daniel Gutson
2014-04-16 12:20 ` Daniel Gutson
2014-04-17 1:09 ` Yao Qi
2014-04-17 14:37 ` Daniel Gutson
2014-04-17 16:27 ` Doug Evans
2014-04-17 17:27 ` Daniel Gutson [this message]
2014-04-17 18:19 ` Doug Evans
2014-04-21 0:56 ` Yao Qi
2014-04-21 16:00 ` Daniel Gutson
2014-04-22 12:14 ` Daniel Gutson
2016-03-04 20:41 ` Daniel Gutson
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=CAF5HaEUjLYqQdgvrwEdUKBJFFeCaaZ8BQQQTSJz1RMo_VEJdUA@mail.gmail.com \
--to=daniel.gutson@tallertechnologies.com \
--cc=dje@google.com \
--cc=gdb-patches@sourceware.org \
--cc=yao@codesourcery.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox