Re: [PATCH] Clear *VAL in regcache_raw_read_unsigned

[Antoine Tremblay <antoine.tremblay@ericsson.com>]

Pedro Alves writes:

> On 02/11/2016 03:15 PM, Yao Qi wrote:
>
>> I think this is better than 'make gdbserver use extract_unsigned_integer',
>> which looks overkill to me.
>
> I think it's only going to bite us back in the future.
>
> From the perspective of potentially making it easier to share more
> code between gdb and gdbserver, I'd prefer that.  Would you object it?
>

For what it's worth, I would also like extract_unsigned_integer to be in
common and have the bfd_enums moved if possible.

>> get-next-pcs stuff needs endianness in GDB side.  In GDBserver,
>> endianness is not needed.

Note that I dropped BE8 support from my single step patches, but should
we ever want to reintroduce something like that endianness would be
needed in GDBServer.

>
> The get-next-pcs stuff does have endianness bits, but it works
> around the lack of 'enum bfd_endian' by hacking it through an int instead:
>

That hack is indeed unfortunate.

>>
>>> patch series that handles that by moving bfd_endian to a separate header.
>>> I've pushed it to the users/palves/gdbserver-extract-unsigned-integer branch
>>> as well.

Thank you!

Regards,
Antoine