This is the mail archive of the gdb-patches@sourceware.org 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]
Other format: [Raw text]

[Fwd: Re: [RFA 3/5] Prec: x86 segment register support: target]


Sorry, hit 'reply' by mistake...
--- Begin Message ---
Doug Evans wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 11:04 AM, Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> wrote:
>>> Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2010 10:53:35 -0400
>>> From: Daniel Jacobowitz <dan@codesourcery.com>
>>> Cc: teawater@gmail.com, msnyder@vmware.com, gdb-patches@sourceware.org,       hjl.tools@gmail.com
>>>
>>> On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 03:33:55PM +0100, Mark Kettenis wrote:
>>>> Sorry, but I don't think adding these xx_base registers is a good
>>>> idea.  They are not acrhitected registers so they don't beling in the
>>>> list of registers.
>>> What do you suggest instead?
>> Would a separate command fit the bill?  (The DJGPP build already has
>> something similar, see "info dos ldt" and its description in the
>> manual with an example of how to use it to display the DS segment base
>> address and limit.)
> 
> I'd have the regs in a separate info command (out of "info regs"),
> there's more than just base, there's the limit and flags regs too, and
> having them would really reduce the S/N ratio of "info reg", but
> having $gs_base, et.al. usable in expressions is really useful (and
> long overdue).  Either that or make "gs:<offset>" as an address work -
> you'd still want to be able to fold it to a "flat" address though.

I'd just like to point out that while all this sounds great,
it shouldn't be a prerequisite to the original task of just
getting prec to record the segments and offsets correctly.

Maybe we should split these two tasks, so that Teawater can
go ahead and accomplish his.

Michael



--- End Message ---

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