Question about adding a new option vs extending an existing one

Question about adding a new option vs extending an existing one

[Zander Work via Gdb]

Hello,

I'm interested in writing a patch for GDB which allows a user to change the radix used for displaying function offsets in instruction listings (example below), right now it only uses decimal, and doesn't respect the existing radix settings (either `radix` or `output-radix`).

I want to contribute a patch that allows the user to change the radix used for displaying these offsets, but I'm not sure if it would be best to re-use the value of `output-radix`, or to define a new setting (eg, `offset-radix` maybe).

Additionally, if a new option should be added, would it be appropriate to have `set radix` also set that new one (I would assume yes).

Does anyone have any opinions on this? My personal feeling is that reusing `output-radix` would be best.

---

(gdb) set radix 16
Input and output radices now set to decimal 16, hex 10, octal 20.
(gdb) x/8i $rip
=> 0x7ffff7fe0c00 <_start>:     mov    %rsp,%rdi
   0x7ffff7fe0c03 <_start+3>:   call   0x7ffff7fe1750 <_dl_start>
   0x7ffff7fe0c08 <_dl_start_user>:     mov    %rax,%r12
   0x7ffff7fe0c0b <_dl_start_user+3>:   mov    %rsp,%r13
   0x7ffff7fe0c0e <_dl_start_user+6>:   mov    0x1cb9c(%rip),%edx        # 0x7ffff7ffd7b0 <_rtld_global+1968>
   0x7ffff7fe0c14 <_dl_start_user+12>:  test   $0x2,%edx
   0x7ffff7fe0c1a <_dl_start_user+18>:  je     0x7ffff7fe0c2d <_dl_start_user+37>
   0x7ffff7fe0c1c <_dl_start_user+20>:  mov    $0x1,%esi
                                  ^^ i am referring to these offsets

Re: Question about adding a new option vs extending an existing one

[Guinevere Larsen via Gdb]

On 4/29/26 9:45 AM, Zander Work via Gdb wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I'm interested in writing a patch for GDB which allows a user to change the radix used for displaying function offsets in instruction listings (example below), right now it only uses decimal, and doesn't respect the existing radix settings (either `radix` or `output-radix`).
>
> I want to contribute a patch that allows the user to change the radix used for displaying these offsets, but I'm not sure if it would be best to re-use the value of `output-radix`, or to define a new setting (eg, `offset-radix` maybe).
>
> Additionally, if a new option should be added, would it be appropriate to have `set radix` also set that new one (I would assume yes).
>
> Does anyone have any opinions on this? My personal feeling is that reusing `output-radix` would be best.

In this case, based on how "set radix" is described in the manual, I 
think this is actually a bug and the offset should already be using the 
specified (output-)radix, so I guess I am with you on the opinion, but 
from the POV that it should already be happening and you're fixing a 
bug, not that it is a feature being extended

-- 
Cheers,
Guinevere Larsen
It/she

>
> ---
>
> (gdb) set radix 16
> Input and output radices now set to decimal 16, hex 10, octal 20.
> (gdb) x/8i $rip
> => 0x7ffff7fe0c00 <_start>:     mov    %rsp,%rdi
>     0x7ffff7fe0c03 <_start+3>:   call   0x7ffff7fe1750 <_dl_start>
>     0x7ffff7fe0c08 <_dl_start_user>:     mov    %rax,%r12
>     0x7ffff7fe0c0b <_dl_start_user+3>:   mov    %rsp,%r13
>     0x7ffff7fe0c0e <_dl_start_user+6>:   mov    0x1cb9c(%rip),%edx        # 0x7ffff7ffd7b0 <_rtld_global+1968>
>     0x7ffff7fe0c14 <_dl_start_user+12>:  test   $0x2,%edx
>     0x7ffff7fe0c1a <_dl_start_user+18>:  je     0x7ffff7fe0c2d <_dl_start_user+37>
>     0x7ffff7fe0c1c <_dl_start_user+20>:  mov    $0x1,%esi
>                                    ^^ i am referring to these offsets
>
>

Re: Question about adding a new option vs extending an existing one

[Zander Work via Gdb]

Cool, that makes sense! Patch (hopefully) coming soon for this.

-Zander

On Wednesday, April 29th, 2026 at 10:40 AM, Guinevere Larsen <guinevere@redhat.com> wrote:

> On 4/29/26 9:45 AM, Zander Work via Gdb wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > I'm interested in writing a patch for GDB which allows a user to change the radix used for displaying function offsets in instruction listings (example below), right now it only uses decimal, and doesn't respect the existing radix settings (either `radix` or `output-radix`).
> >
> > I want to contribute a patch that allows the user to change the radix used for displaying these offsets, but I'm not sure if it would be best to re-use the value of `output-radix`, or to define a new setting (eg, `offset-radix` maybe).
> >
> > Additionally, if a new option should be added, would it be appropriate to have `set radix` also set that new one (I would assume yes).
> >
> > Does anyone have any opinions on this? My personal feeling is that reusing `output-radix` would be best.
> 
> In this case, based on how "set radix" is described in the manual, I
> think this is actually a bug and the offset should already be using the
> specified (output-)radix, so I guess I am with you on the opinion, but
> from the POV that it should already be happening and you're fixing a
> bug, not that it is a feature being extended
> 
> --
> Cheers,
> Guinevere Larsen
> It/she
> 
> >
> > ---
> >
> > (gdb) set radix 16
> > Input and output radices now set to decimal 16, hex 10, octal 20.
> > (gdb) x/8i $rip
> > => 0x7ffff7fe0c00 <_start>:     mov    %rsp,%rdi
> >     0x7ffff7fe0c03 <_start+3>:   call   0x7ffff7fe1750 <_dl_start>
> >     0x7ffff7fe0c08 <_dl_start_user>:     mov    %rax,%r12
> >     0x7ffff7fe0c0b <_dl_start_user+3>:   mov    %rsp,%r13
> >     0x7ffff7fe0c0e <_dl_start_user+6>:   mov    0x1cb9c(%rip),%edx        # 0x7ffff7ffd7b0 <_rtld_global+1968>
> >     0x7ffff7fe0c14 <_dl_start_user+12>:  test   $0x2,%edx
> >     0x7ffff7fe0c1a <_dl_start_user+18>:  je     0x7ffff7fe0c2d <_dl_start_user+37>
> >     0x7ffff7fe0c1c <_dl_start_user+20>:  mov    $0x1,%esi
> >                                    ^^ i am referring to these offsets
> >
> >
> 
>