From: Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@mvista.com>
To: Kris Warkentin <kewarken@qnx.com>
Cc: "Gdb@Sources.Redhat.Com" <gdb@sources.redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC] upload/download command
Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2003 15:39:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20031117153928.GA11964@nevyn.them.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <03fe01c3ad20$64036a50$0202040a@catdog>
On Mon, Nov 17, 2003 at 10:35:12AM -0500, Kris Warkentin wrote:
> > > I would like to keep these things in our protocol but it might be useful
> to
> > > generalize the interface out to core gdb. What I'm thinking is that I
> > > create a general upload/download command that uses a hook into the
> target's
> > > code for any special functionality. We could have a general one for
> native
> > > targets which would basically be 'copy' (probably not all that useful
> but
> > > there for completeness) and just print 'not implemented' for targets
> which
> > > don't define the hooks.
> >
> > Rather don't implement it for native I think... hm, might be easier to
> > test the core parts if we did.
>
> That's what I was thinking....it doesn't really hurt anything.
>
> > > Any ideas, comments, suggestions, etc.?
> >
> > For starters, how about describing how it works in your protocol?
> > Obviously this could be useful to gdbserver. For mechanics, it may
> > want to be another target_read_partial()...
>
> We actually have a remote_fileopen command in our protocol. The host sends
> an open command to the target and then just sends blocks of data for the
> target server to write out. Then a close message tells the remote to close
> it. It's basically identical to an ordinary open command so you can open on
> the remote for reading/writing/etc.
Sounds like a good fit for target_read_partial with the exception that
we don't have open/close right now. I don't think we'd need to add
them for this; for that kind of copy, the remote could assume that it
would keep the file open until we'd read the whole file. Might be more
efficient not to.
> I'm not sure about gdbserver though. Do you even presume the existence of a
> filesystem on the remote?
Yes. Don't confuse gdbserver with the generic remote protocol;
gdbserver is a Unix-equivalent (Linux only right now) stub, using
ptrace.
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
MontaVista Software Debian GNU/Linux Developer
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2003-11-17 15:39 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2003-11-17 15:18 Kris Warkentin
2003-11-17 15:26 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2003-11-17 15:34 ` Kris Warkentin
2003-11-17 15:39 ` Daniel Jacobowitz [this message]
2003-11-17 15:51 ` Andrew Cagney
2003-11-17 15:42 ` Andrew Cagney
2003-11-17 16:22 Ken Dyck
2003-11-17 18:01 ` Kris Warkentin
2003-11-18 3:08 ` Andrew Cagney
2003-11-18 15:03 ` Kris Warkentin
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20031117153928.GA11964@nevyn.them.org \
--to=drow@mvista.com \
--cc=gdb@sources.redhat.com \
--cc=kewarken@qnx.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox