From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gdb-patches-return-53377-listarch-gdb-patches=sources.redhat.com@sourceware.org>
Received: (qmail 26336 invoked by alias); 16 Jan 2008 18:43:43 -0000
Received: (qmail 26328 invoked by uid 22791); 16 Jan 2008 18:43:42 -0000
X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Received: from nitzan.inter.net.il (HELO nitzan.inter.net.il) (213.8.233.22)     by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Wed, 16 Jan 2008 18:43:23 +0000
Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 (IGLD-84-228-249-38.inter.net.il [84.228.249.38]) 	by nitzan.inter.net.il (MOS 3.7.3a-GA) 	with ESMTP id IWK61449 (AUTH halo1); 	Wed, 16 Jan 2008 20:40:46 +0200 (IST)
Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2008 18:43:00 -0000
Message-Id: <uodblpq60.fsf@gnu.org>
From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>
To: Markus Deuling <deuling@de.ibm.com>
CC: uweigand@de.ibm.com, gdb-patches@sourceware.org, drow@false.org
In-reply-to: <478D9CB1.3060905@de.ibm.com> (message from Markus Deuling on 	Wed, 16 Jan 2008 06:57:05 +0100)
Subject: Re: [patch] Remove BITS_BIG_ENDIAN from defs.h
Reply-to: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>
References: <200801152101.m0FL12x2012798@d12av02.megacenter.de.ibm.com> <478D9CB1.3060905@de.ibm.com>
X-IsSubscribed: yes
Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gdb-patches.sourceware.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gdb-patches-subscribe@sourceware.org>
List-Archive: <http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/>
List-Post: <mailto:gdb-patches@sourceware.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org
X-SW-Source: 2008-01/txt/msg00409.txt.bz2

> Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2008 06:57:05 +0100
> From: Markus Deuling <deuling@de.ibm.com>
> CC: GDB Patches <gdb-patches@sourceware.org>, Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>,
>         Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@false.org>
> 
> Eli, is the documentation ok like this ?

I have a few comments:

> ChangeLog Doc:
> 
> 	* gdbint.texinfo (BITS_BIG_ENDIAN): Rewrite to match
> 	gdbarch_bits_big_endian.

Actually, this should say something like:

	* gdbint.texinfo (Target Conditionals): Replace the
	description of BITS_BIG_ENDIAN with a description of
	gdbarch_bits_big_endian.

Note that the text in parens is the name of the node in which you make
the change.

> +@item gdbarch_bits_big_endian (@var{gdbarch})
> +@findex gdbarch_bits_big_endian
> +Set this if the numbering of bits in the targets does @strong{not} match the

"Set this" isn't right, because you don't "set" a function.  I think
it's better to say "Define this to return non-zero it bits are
numbered in the big-endian order (i.e., the rightmost bit has the
largest number), zero otherwise."

Btw, should we also document set_gdbarch_bits_big_endian?