This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the binutils project.
Re: [PATCH, updated] Add support for setting disassembler-options in GDB for POWER, ARM and S390
- From: Pedro Alves <palves at redhat dot com>
- To: Yao Qi <qiyaoltc at gmail dot com>
- Cc: Peter Bergner <bergner at vnet dot ibm dot com>, "gdb-patches at sourceware dot org" <gdb-patches at sourceware dot org>, Alan Modra <amodra at gmail dot com>, Ulrich Weigand <uweigand at de dot ibm dot com>, Eli Zaretskii <eliz at gnu dot org>, Nick Clifton <nickc at redhat dot com>, binutils <binutils at sourceware dot org>
- Date: Tue, 14 Feb 2017 17:35:03 +0000
- Subject: Re: [PATCH, updated] Add support for setting disassembler-options in GDB for POWER, ARM and S390
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <email@example.com> <firstname.lastname@example.org> <email@example.com> <CAH=s-PORT5jzW+xsQzNmFLNrpGyLefuBmbZd8SQhujb6t6LtuA@mail.gmail.com>
On 02/14/2017 05:21 PM, Yao Qi wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 13, 2017 at 4:58 PM, Pedro Alves <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
>> On 02/13/2017 03:52 PM, Yao Qi wrote:
>>> These options should be modeled as per-architecture data. We need to
>>> define a key to access that data dynamically. grep
>>> "static struct gdbarch_data *" in *.c.
>> If I understand the suggestion correctly, that would make all the different
>> POWER (etc.) gdbarch instances have their own instance of the option string.
> Hi Pedro,
> Peter's patch makes each gdbarch instance has its own instance of
> option string set by GDB. Peter's patch adds two things in gdbarch,
> +# Functions for allowing a target to modify its disassembler options.
> +v:char *:disassembler_options:::0:0::0:pstring (gdbarch->disassembler_options)
> +v:const disasm_options_t
> The former one is a string, and it is per-gdbarch-instance. The latter is a
> function, which provides all valid options for an arch. Different gdbarch
> instances for powerpc, for example, have the same valid options, but each
> gdbarch instance will have its own setting (set by GDB command).
Then I'm a bit surprised, since that was not what was discussed
earlier, here <https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2016-11/msg00043.html>:
> I didn't realize we could have multiple gdbarchs for the same
> arch live at the same time. Do you have a suggestion on how
> to fix this? Maybe each arch will have its own *-tdep.c global
> var to hold it and maybe store a pointer to that in the gdbarch?
Yeah, that sounds like the simplest way to handle it.
In order to implement the above, the gdbarch should be storing
a "char **", but it is storing a "char *" instead:
+v:char *:disassembler_options:::0:0::0:pstring (gdbarch->disassembler_options)
So I don't know why the current patch is doing it differently,
and I was going by that earlier discussion.
> My suggestion about using "struct gdbarch_data *" doesn't change the
> the behaviour.
Thanks for checking. So the question now is why does the
current patch want to behave like that. :-)