This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sourceware.org
mailing list for the GDB project.
Fwd: RFA: GDB manual: clarify lack of restrictions on 'm' packets
- From: Jim Blandy <jimb at red-bean dot com>
- To: gdb-patches at sources dot redhat dot com
- Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2005 22:38:30 -0800
- Subject: Fwd: RFA: GDB manual: clarify lack of restrictions on 'm' packets
- References: <8f2776cb0511150102s42abc0a7xfe9ee344ab0224b3@mail.gmail.com> <u4q6d94ly.fsf@gnu.org> <8f2776cb0511151158n20cc5636kc974bc0cf9d967c1@mail.gmail.com> <uy83p6sf9.fsf@gnu.org> <8f2776cb0511152223q4c1414f1l2218bc10dbdfa74e@mail.gmail.com>
Accidentally dropped gdb-patches from the recipients.
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Jim Blandy <jimb@red-bean.com>
Date: Nov 15, 2005 10:23 PM
Subject: Re: RFA: GDB manual: clarify lack of restrictions on 'm' packets
To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>
On 11/15/05, Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> wrote:
> > Some possibilities:
> >
> > @cindex alignment of remote memory accesses
> > @cindex size of remote memory accesses
> > @cindex memory, alignment and size of remote accesses
> > @cindex memory-mapped input/output and remote protocol
> > @cindex input/output, memory-mapped and remote protocol
> >
> > I could go on like that, but it feel like overkill. What do you think?
>
> #1 and #3 will do, I think.
For memory-mapped I/O, both alignment and size matter; I don't think
there's a sense in which one is more relevant to the question than the
other. So I've committed 1-3; patch attached. I'm happy to change it
if you disagree, of course.
2005-11-15 Jim Blandy <jimb@redhat.com>
* gdb.texinfo (Packets): Add index entries for 'm' packet
disclaimers.
gdb/doc/ChangeLog:
2005-11-15 Jim Blandy <jimb@redhat.com>
* gdb.texinfo (Packets): Add index entries for 'm' packet
disclaimers.
Index: gdb/doc/gdb.texinfo
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvs/src/src/gdb/doc/gdb.texinfo,v
retrieving revision 1.290
diff -c -p -r1.290 gdb.texinfo
*** gdb/doc/gdb.texinfo 15 Nov 2005 19:58:30 -0000 1.290
--- gdb/doc/gdb.texinfo 16 Nov 2005 06:17:08 -0000
*************** data from memory for the response; even
*** 22332,22337 ****
--- 22332,22340 ----
and @var{length} is a multiple of the word size, the stub is free to
use byte accesses, or not. For this reason, this packet may not be
suitable for accessing memory-mapped I/O devices.
+ @cindex alignment of remote memory accesses
+ @cindex size of remote memory accesses
+ @cindex memory, alignment and size of remote accesses
Reply:
@table @samp