From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@delorie.com>
To: dje@transmeta.com
Cc: taylor@cygnus.com, gdb@sources.redhat.com
Subject: Re: harvard architectures - the d10v
Date: Fri, 09 Feb 2001 00:25:00 -0000
Message-id: <200102090825.DAA23231@indy.delorie.com>
References: <200102082037.PAA07784@texas.cygnus.com> <14979.4102.901998.291182@casey.transmeta.com>
X-SW-Source: 2001-02/msg00100.html

> From: Doug Evans <dje@transmeta.com>
> Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2001 13:30:46 -0800 (PST)
> 
> Agreed.  The way I would extend this is to name the address space
> you want the address to refer to.  Without claiming this is
> the best syntax/wording/etc., maybe something like
> 
> x/x insn:0x12345678
> x/i insn:0x12345678
> x/x data:0x12345678
> x/i data:0x12345678
> 
> - there could be a default address space,
>   or target could specify that "x/x 0x12345678 is an error
> - users of targets without address spaces would see no change
> - I would treat the address space names as target specific
> 
> Implementation-wise, this would get translated to a CORE_ADDR
> that had two parts: address space id, and address.

Are we introducing segments into GDB?  Because if we are, I can think
about a few more possible applications, for x86 for example.