From: Andrew Cagney <ac131313@cygnus.com>
To: LeakyStain <leakstan@erols.com>
Cc: gdb@sources.redhat.com
Subject: gdbint.info; Was: Obsolete m32r?
Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2002 15:51:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <3C3E290B.7020902@cygnus.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <3C3E1592.633CD862@erols.com>
> It would help if the gdbint.info was updated first, to label the macros
> obsolete or deprecated, and describe multi-arch more completely.
Obsolete macros are deleted (when someone notices they are not in use or
removes all uses). There is no pre-documented warning that this will
happen however strong hints are found on
http://sources.redhat.com/gdb/ari/ .
The intention (discussed last year) is to more clearly identify
deprecated macro's and functions by adding the prefix deprecated_....().
> I started working on a port of gdb 5.0 to the ut69r in September 2001,
> and I read gdbint.info pretty thoroughly; there was only one mention of
> multi-arch, and it was pretty obscure. So I implemented the macros, and
> now I discover I have to change them.
Prior to the 5.1 release I tried to update the internals doco so that it
better represented current reality (1, 2):
http://sources.redhat.com/gdb/onlinedocs/gdbint_9.html#SEC67
The introduction is correct. The misleading part is where it uses the
words macro vs function. Looking at it I probably should have simply
replaced all uses of the word macro with function (it is complicated
because currently most architecture methods are still accessed via a
macro by core-GDB :-/). The section on files points out that tm-*.h
files are not needed and should not be created.
Overall it could do with more work. With 5.1 I was more worried about
getting the coding standard section to better reflect reality.
If you're wondering about the big picture see:
http://sources.redhat.com/gdb/papers/multi-arch/whatis.html
http://sources.redhat.com/gdb/papers/multi-arch/real-multi-arch/
If you're wondering what you need to change see:
http://sources.redhat.com/gdb/papers/multi-arch/howto.html
Andrew
(1) GDB currently isn't multi-arch. At this stage multi-arch just
refers to implementing a target using the architecture vector.
(1) Hmm, section 9.1 is completly out-of-date. GDB and the compiler's register numberings are now completly independant!
prev parent reply other threads:[~2002-01-10 23:51 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2002-01-06 9:44 Andrew Cagney
2002-01-06 21:23 ` Michael Snyder
2002-01-09 9:24 ` Andrew Cagney
2002-01-10 14:28 ` LeakyStain
2002-01-10 15:51 ` Andrew Cagney [this message]
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=3C3E290B.7020902@cygnus.com \
--to=ac131313@cygnus.com \
--cc=gdb@sources.redhat.com \
--cc=leakstan@erols.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