This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GDB project.
On Tuesday 28 January 2003 20:45, Andrew Cagney wrote:
> > Hi Andrew!
> >> Turns out this has been done.
> >> > We have also problems with registers. You were saying something that
> >> > we should move all the registers (we have 8k+ registers with generated
> >> > names) into the temporary storage (I hope all these won't get cached
> >> > in the host...).
> 8k * 8 bytes ~= 64k.
> Either that all lives in the text segment, or it is only allocated when
> all the names are asked for.
I was referring more to register transfer. Most of the registers should not be
chached at all -- the value read from these special purpose registers (SPRs)
can differ in time/access. Some registers may also have clear-after-read,
FIFO implemented or any other obscure functionality.
It would be nice if all names would be generated, instead of storing their
names, however I suppose nobody with our target will complain about high
Another problem is with printing it out and displaying. Unfortunatelly I don't
know how exaclty the remote debuggers work (we mostly use DDD), but if they
try to read all registers when e.g. they reach breakpoint -- it will break
the target (because e.g. clear-after-read). And besides it may take a while
to load them all in.
> >> Yes. A gui for instance will likely want access to all names at once.
> > I tried to fix this issue, but there were not enough documentation nor
> > such targets for me to dig through. Is it possible that you (or somebody
> > else) change this please?
> I'm not sure what the problem is. Just wrap the current code in
> something that maintains a table of previously returned names.
I don't know a lot of internals, which are common knowledge for most here, and
I didn't know if my solutions would solve all above issues.