From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 29065 invoked by alias); 7 May 2005 01:36:51 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 29031 invoked from network); 7 May 2005 01:36:44 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO nevyn.them.org) (66.93.172.17) by sourceware.org with SMTP; 7 May 2005 01:36:44 -0000 Received: from drow by nevyn.them.org with local (Exim 4.50 #1 (Debian)) id 1DUEFE-0006nK-UC; Fri, 06 May 2005 21:36:41 -0400 Date: Sat, 07 May 2005 01:36:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: Paul Schlie Cc: gdb@sourceware.org Subject: Re: Available registers as a target property Message-ID: <20050507013640.GA26032@nevyn.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: Paul Schlie , gdb@sourceware.org References: <20050506232741.GA22741@nevyn.them.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.8i X-SW-Source: 2005-05/txt/msg00083.txt.bz2 On Fri, May 06, 2005 at 08:55:59PM -0400, Paul Schlie wrote: > My sense is that the fundamental difference is where the information is > described/contained, and how the choice of which description to use is > conveyed to the GDB. Although I may misunderstand, it seems more consistent > to enable GDB to select which of N register models to assume based upon the > target's identification, than requiring the target to supply a detailed > description of it's own register model; thereby not requiring any otherwise > unnecessary complexity be added to the target's GDB server implementation? The proposal supports both. This is the difference between register/feature sets and individual registers. All hardware does not fit into nice models that GDB can know about. A synthesized ARM core, for instance, can have arbitrary proprietary coprocessors on it, designed by whoever synthesized the design. Or even in ia32 land, the set of MSRs available varies wildly, and it is not GDB's business to track that level of details about every x86-compatible processor ever made. Maintaining a central registry of all register configurations is not practical. -- Daniel Jacobowitz CodeSourcery, LLC