Re: [RFC/RFA] gdb extension for Harvard architectures

[Jim Blandy <jimb at zwingli dot cygnus dot com>]

Andrew Cagney <ac131313@cygnus.com> writes:
> Any way, consider the intent of someone entering a sequence like:
> 
> 	(gdb) x/w foo
> 	0x0
> 	(gdb) x/i foo
> 	nop
> 	(gdb) print/x *(int*)foo
> 	0xdeadbeef
> 
> vs 
> (gdb) print/x *(int*)foo
> 	0x0
> 
> and where should this go:
> 
> 	(gdb) set *(int*)foo = 0xdeadbeef
> 
> This mysterious address switching strikes me as wierd.

It *is* weird, but I think it's an intrinsic weirdness of Harvard
architectures that it would be a disservice to conceal.

Seriously, you can't protect the user from the oddities of the chip
they're working on.  And I think we shouldn't: GDB's job is to help
people observe the behavior of the program, and tools for observation
must be careful not to edit reality too much.  It's perfectly okay to
tell someone, "You don't understand your architecture; do it this
way."  (Rather, the manual should say this, and we should point them
at it.)