From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 20348 invoked by alias); 30 Mar 2007 18:08:37 -0000 Received: (qmail 20338 invoked by uid 22791); 30 Mar 2007 18:08:36 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mail.codesourcery.com (HELO mail.codesourcery.com) (65.74.133.4) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Fri, 30 Mar 2007 19:08:34 +0100 Received: (qmail 29584 invoked from network); 30 Mar 2007 18:08:32 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO localhost) (jimb@127.0.0.2) by mail.codesourcery.com with ESMTPA; 30 Mar 2007 18:08:32 -0000 To: Michael Eager Cc: gdb@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: GDB Documentation and Request for Help References: <460D46B7.10902@eagercon.com> From: Jim Blandy Date: Fri, 30 Mar 2007 18:08:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: <460D46B7.10902@eagercon.com> (Michael Eager's message of "Fri, 30 Mar 2007 10:19:51 -0700") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.0.50 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2007-03/txt/msg00340.txt.bz2 Michael Eager writes: > So that's coming along, but I'm having trouble figuring out > frame handling, in particular, when and where the current target > registers are read into the current frame. This is a tricky part; welcome to the club. :) > So I found the description of frames and the sentinel frame. > Not where I had been looking, under the chapter titled Target > Architecture Definition, but by accident, under Algorithms. > Under the former section, I found what I was looking for: > FRAME_INIT_SAVED_REGISTERS, now renamed DEPRECATED_. But when > I look in the code, I find that this was removed in 2004. > > So the gdb internals document comes close to being useless, > IMO. There are several sections which are empty, others which > declare themselves to be obsolete, parts which are more-or-less > unclear, and worse, parts which appear to explain the internals > but are several years out of date. The internals document functions more as a repository of explanations that get written from time to time. It certainly doesn't meet the usual standards for reference works. > If someone would volunteer to spend an hour or two helping me > understand frame handling and what parts of the Architecture > Definition section are (as the politicos say) no longer > operative, and what they should say, I'll update the document > to incorporate those changes. I won't rewrite the gdb internals > document, although it really needs this, but even removing > misleading text would be an improvement. If you post here, I think people would be happy to explain what's current and what isn't. I'll watch for your messages.