Re: RFC: Two small remote protocol extensions

Andrew Cagney
2003-09-22T00:27:32Z

> OK. I think there's room to add it to something like this, so I'm not
> gonna fret about it for now.
>
>
>> > Ht 'TID' 'DISPOSITION' [';' 'TID' 'DISPOSITION']... [';' 'DISPOSITION']
>> >
>> >'TID' should be a numeric thread ID, to affect one thread.
>> >
>> >'DISPOSITION' can be:
>> > 's'
>> > 'c'
>> > 'C' 'SIGNAL'
>
>>
>> I hope TID is decimal :-)

Hmm, I think it should be more LL1, which the above (and the remote
protocol :-) isn't. Something like:

c:TID
s:TID
C:SIG:TID

that way someone can later add:

p:REG:VALUE

Oh and TID is hex:

if (strncmp (p, "thread", p1 - p) == 0)
{
p_temp = unpack_varlen_hex (++p1, &thread_num);

> by @code{REGISTER_RAW_SIZE}; @var{n...} = @samp{thread}, @var{r...} =
> thread process ID, this is a hex integer; @var{n...} = (@samp{watch} |

:-(

> Heh, 'c', right. Any objection to using decimal thread IDs, or would
> you rather have 'TID' : 'DISPOSITION' ; ... ?
>
>
>> >A final 'DISPOSITION' is applied to all threads not explicitly listed.
>> >
>> >Note that this Ht is a continue packet, not a select-thread packet. So
>> >Ht is not a good choice.
>
>>
>> Yep.
>
>
> How about, um, "vCont"?

As in:

vCont;s:456;C04:aba;c

or "n" for "next"

[n]ext;s:456;C04:aba;c

Main thing is that, the entire leading word must be matched.

The choice, I think, is: a, e, E, f, h, j, J, K, l, L, n, N, o, O, u, U,
v, V, w, x, y, Y.

(I should mark [eE] has do-not-use).

Andrew