From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 30474 invoked by alias); 15 Nov 2005 04:34:56 -0000 Received: (qmail 30460 invoked by uid 22791); 15 Nov 2005 04:34:53 -0000 Received: from nevyn.them.org (HELO nevyn.them.org) (66.93.172.17) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.30-dev) with ESMTP; Tue, 15 Nov 2005 04:34:53 +0000 Received: from drow by nevyn.them.org with local (Exim 4.54) id 1EbsWu-0003HF-Hn; Mon, 14 Nov 2005 23:34:48 -0500 Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2005 04:34:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: Eli Zaretskii Cc: Jim Blandy , gdb@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: "A word-aligned memory transfer mechanism is needed" Message-ID: <20051115043448.GA12583@nevyn.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: Eli Zaretskii , Jim Blandy , gdb@sources.redhat.com References: <8f2776cb0511141858x1e140278vdfe58bc3efee2a6@mail.gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.8i Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2005-11/txt/msg00288.txt.bz2 On Tue, Nov 15, 2005 at 06:09:16AM +0200, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > > Date: Mon, 14 Nov 2005 18:58:56 -0800 > > From: Jim Blandy > > > > Do folks agree that this is what that meant to say? If we're not sure > > what it means, we should take it out. > > I'm not familiar with history, but your conclusions sound plausible. Same from me, also. I agree that the argument to m/M does not need to be word aligned, and that this is worth writing down; I'm not sure whether we need a word-sized I/O interface, but I agree that if we grow one, it should not use the same m/M packets. -- Daniel Jacobowitz CodeSourcery, LLC