This is the mail archive of the gdb@sources.redhat.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]
Other format:	[Raw text]

Re: [RFC] Register sets

From: Andrew Cagney <ac131313 at redhat dot com>
To: Mark Kettenis <kettenis at chello dot nl>
Cc: Daniel Jacobowitz <drow at mvista dot com>, gdb at sources dot redhat dot com
Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2003 14:40:28 -0400
Subject: Re: [RFC] Register sets
References: <200308232249.h7NMnvhh090154@elgar.kettenis.dyndns.org> <20030824164347.GA17520@nevyn.them.org> <200308252234.h7PMYqFu001245@elgar.kettenis.dyndns.org> <3F4B8173.1000302@redhat.com> <20030826165547.GA22836@nevyn.them.org> <86he3xrkjb.fsf@elgar.kettenis.dyndns.org>

The read_regset function is necessary to support the `gcore' command.
It should use regcache_raw_read to fetch all relevant registers from
the running target, such that we don't need target_fetch_registers(-1)
first.

GDB currently has a conflict here. GCORE should definitly use regcache_raw_read, but that still leaves the ptrace code writing back register values - it uses regcache_collect. Hmm, perhaphs it two should be using a regcache_raw_read anyway - might even make it possible to eliminate "target_prepare_to_store"?

I like the use of BFD's names.

Andrew

Follow-Ups:
- Re: [RFC] Register sets
  - From: Mark Kettenis

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