From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48) id CBE92385803B; Wed, 6 Mar 2024 12:05:29 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org CBE92385803B DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sourceware.org; s=default; t=1709726729; bh=LnpFf8sYeu7TX2Lm9E7jl6u1TnPLTz9RzHa6uQRgrHk=; h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=OGGjNlko6Pqlg5zOjYzVQs3eVXUETlmOQuDv3K1YyAdbU5K86BmAz1JYX3NAQzhBQ tozQqkzVETgsFk0EY0B+T3p+mKgyf7jDIWcPzawx9zygUwGPnZKqBrIXfn9pTF2jrK 82j4b4ubl07SvoybLDlYorclxdH4lzcaPMXd/ozQ= From: "robert.pirvu at cyberthorstudios dot com" To: gdb-prs@sourceware.org Subject: [Bug mi/31448] [Feature Request] Register's bitfields MI Commands Date: Wed, 06 Mar 2024 12:05:28 +0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: gdb X-Bugzilla-Component: mi X-Bugzilla-Version: unknown X-Bugzilla-Keywords: X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal X-Bugzilla-Who: robert.pirvu at cyberthorstudios dot com X-Bugzilla-Status: UNCONFIRMED X-Bugzilla-Resolution: X-Bugzilla-Priority: P2 X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at sourceware dot org X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: --- X-Bugzilla-Flags: X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Bugzilla-URL: http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated MIME-Version: 1.0 List-Id: https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D31448 --- Comment #2 from Robert P=C3=AErvu --- Register View uses two MI Commands to populate the view with registers. One command which returns the names of the registers, and another which returns= the positions and values of the registers. I wanted to have a bit of consistency with the commands and that is why I proposed to have something similar, one command to return the names of bitfields and one for the values. And it wil= l be a lot easier for this to work with the existing parsers used by the Register View. Maybe instead of implementing a new command for getting the bitfield's name= s, we can use the same approach by adding a --with-bitfields option to the -data-list-register-name MI Command. It might be better than having to crea= te a new MI Command which will be used only in this case. And I forgot to mention this, in case the register doesn't have bitfields, = then the bitfields list will be empty. --=20 You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.=