RE: [PATCH v6 07/10] btrace, gdbserver: Add ptwrite to btrace_config_pt.

["Willgerodt, Felix" <felix.willgerodt@intel.com>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>
> Sent: Freitag, 16. September 2022 13:49
> To: Willgerodt, Felix <felix.willgerodt@intel.com>
> Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org; Metzger, Markus T
> <markus.t.metzger@intel.com>
> Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 07/10] btrace, gdbserver: Add ptwrite to
> btrace_config_pt.
> 
> > Date: Fri, 16 Sep 2022 13:36:43 +0200
> > From: Felix Willgerodt via Gdb-patches <gdb-patches@sourceware.org>
> >
> > +@item Qbtrace-conf:pt:ptwrite=@var{(yes|no)}
> > +Indicate support for ptwrite packets.  This allows for backwards-
> > +compatibility.
> 
> I think "ptwrite" should be in @code, since it's a program symbol.
>

My intention was to use @code{PTWRITE} for the instruction. And lower case for
every ptwrite related "thing". E.g. the ptwrite packet, the ptwrite payload,
the ptwrite filter, the ptwrite auxiliary information etc.
But I will change it if that is preferred. I don't have a strong preference.

> Also, we leave hyphenation to TeX, so please don't break lines at the
> hyphen, as you did with "backwards-compatibility".

Thanks. I fixed it locally.

> > +Reply:
> > +@table @samp
> > +@item OK
> > +The ptwrite config parameter has been set.
>        ^^^^^^^
> @code{ptwrite}
> 

Here I am not so sure if it makes sense.
Here it is the config parameter in the RSP packet. Not the instruction.
I could wrap it in @samp{}? I see that other packets are wrapped like that.

Thanks,
Felix

Intel Deutschland GmbH
Registered Address: Am Campeon 10, 85579 Neubiberg, Germany
Tel: +49 89 99 8853-0, www.intel.de <http://www.intel.de>
Managing Directors: Christin Eisenschmid, Sharon Heck, Tiffany Doon Silva  
Chairperson of the Supervisory Board: Nicole Lau
Registered Office: Munich
Commercial Register: Amtsgericht Muenchen HRB 186928