This is the mail archive of the gdb-patches@sourceware.cygnus.com mailing list for the GDB project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]

Re: Patch for RDI target code to allow user-specified devices


Hi Grant, nice to see you're back.

Grant Edwards wrote:
> 
> Hello,
> 
> The attached patch against 4.18 sources modifies the RDI target
> unix comm code to allow users to specify any device they please
> to be used for serial and/or parallel communication with the
> target.
> 
> The current routines limit the user to a certain set of devices
> (which never seems to include the one I want).  I've tripped
> over this many times.  With the patch applied, the target
> commands like
> 
>  target rdi s=/whatever/flipping/device/the/user/wants
>  target rdi s=/serial/device/name,p=/parallel/device/name
> 
> Will accept whatever the user specifies (I think the path is
> limited to 64 characters).  After all it's _my_ computer and I
> do, in fact, know which serial port is hooked to the target!
> The fact that the ARM Ltd. code won't believe me has always
> been annoying...
> 
So far so good.

However, people also like to specify:

  target rdi /dev/ttyS0

and let gdb figure this is a serial device (the same applies to a parallel device).
When you cut the "if" you cut it too short, and now one is required to specify the "s:" or "p:".

If you put that back I think it is fine.  You should be able to have a different device name, as long as you let gdb
know if it is a serial "s:" or parallel "p:" device -- it is the price you pay (but we cannot impose this on the ones
with standard names, right?)

> Yes, I know, the patched code uses a different indenting style
> that the rest of the file -- if this is a problem, feel free to
> re-indent it however you please.  I simply can not easily grok
> the existing style.
> 

Now we really got to a crossroads here.  I believe the reason people were leaving the indentation alone was because we
could eventually receive a newer code from ARM and having their indentation would help scanning for the differences.  We
have already changed this code a lot, and they probably did the same, so a diff would probably be useless.

We could discuss with the other interested parts a move (moving to gdb@sourceware) a possible GNU style reindentations
of the whole rdi-share directory.  This would take time.

I could eventually reindent it myself, but with the size of my current todo list this will take even longer :-)

Mixing the two indentation styles gives me the creeps.  I don't know what Stan and Andrew think about this but I would
guess they may also object.

The fastest way to get you patch in would be for you to keep the current indentation.  In the meanwhile you could
propose a GNU reindentation of the whole thing to gdb@sourceware.

But don't worry about the possible differences from 4.18 sources with or without patches.  I will take care of adjusting
that for you.

Best regards,
Fernando







-- 
Fernando Nasser
Red Hat - Toronto                       E-Mail:  fnasser@cygnus.com
2323 Yonge Street, Suite #300           Tel:  416-482-2661 ext. 311
Toronto, Ontario   M4P 2C9              Fax:  416-482-6299

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]