From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andreas Jaeger To: Andrew Cagney Cc: Jiri Smid , gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: Misc; Was: [RFA]: x86_64 target files Date: Thu, 30 Aug 2001 11:03:00 -0000 Message-id: References: <3B738589.4050605@cygnus.com> <3B8E5021.2070209@cygnus.com> X-SW-Source: 2001-08/msg00310.html Andrew Cagney writes: >>> Have a look at the ARM which queries opcodes for a list of disassembly variants >>> instead of duplicating those variants here. >>> >> I have looked at ARM and there is list of dissassembly flavors >> (register set names) obtained from binutils. But in i386/x86_64 case there >> is no way how to get list of flavors. I am not sure what do you mean... >> Changes in binutils? > > Hmm, the interface isn't as clean as I remembered :-). Yes, it would > mean getting a change into binutils. > > The theory is that GDB knows nothing about the assembler except how to > call it. It defers to opcodes for things like assembler flavour names > - > this guarentees that objdump and GDB have a consistent interface. For > you, it is looking like the best thing is to file a PR and follow it > up later. I can try to take care of this in binutils. You suggest something like get_arm_regnames in opcodes/arm-dis.c I guess? I'll look tomorrow into this, Andreas -- Andreas Jaeger SuSE Labs aj@suse.de private aj@arthur.inka.de http://www.suse.de/~aj