Re: [remote] Make registers network byteordered?

[fche@redhat.com (Frank Ch. Eigler)]

cagney wrote:

: [...]
: > What's the point?  Simply that registers don't have an endianness?
: 
: Several motivations:
: [...]
: 	o	I've had it with trying to read
: 		what are endian independant values
: 		backwards.

Certainly a laudable goal.  What would be the corresponding syntax for
the `g' and `p'/`P' packets?  Is there any intended support for
mismatching register sizes (e.g., 4-byte vs sign-extended 8-byte MIPS
pointers)?

- FChE
From qqi@world.std.com Wed Dec 06 05:24:00 2000
From: Quality Quorum <qqi@world.std.com>
To: "Frank Ch. Eigler" <fche@redhat.com>
Cc: Andrew Cagney <ac131313@cygnus.com>, GDB Discussion <gdb@sourceware.cygnus.com>
Subject: Re: [remote] Make registers network byteordered?
Date: Wed, 06 Dec 2000 05:24:00 -0000
Message-id: <Pine.SGI.4.21.0012060823030.23073-100000@world.std.com>
References: <o566kytwbv.fsf@toenail.toronto.redhat.com>
X-SW-Source: 2000-12/msg00031.html
Content-length: 623

On 5 Dec 2000, Frank Ch. Eigler wrote:

> Andrew Cagney <ac131313@cygnus.com> writes:
> 
> : [..]
> : At present the target sends back registers in target byte order format
> : vis:
> : 	T0525:c4060280ffffffff;1d:c0ffff81ffffffff;
> : I'd like to think about a [tweak] to this part of the protocol so that the
> : format:
> : 	T0525=ffffffff80020664;1d=ffffffff81ffffc0;
> : is accepted.  [...]
> 
> How are gdb and the target supposed to pick the right scheme?  Do you
> imagine some sort of prior negotiation?


Gdb knows what target it is working with. Can you debug unknown target ?

> 
> - FChE
> 

Thanks,

Aleksey