Re: RFC: Available registers as a target property

["Eli Zaretskii" <eliz@gnu.org>]

> Date: Sat, 7 May 2005 12:19:39 -0400
> From: Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@false.org>
> 
> I do plan to write documentation to go along with these changes.

Thanks!

> For sim and native targets, there are other architecture hooks and
> bits of global state in GDB that the target can read and write.

I hope we could find a way to come up with a common infrastructure
that would unify all these types of targets.

> > Also, is it indeed a fact that information about registers is the only
> > issue GDB has to deal with in such situations?  Maybe we need to think
> > about a more general mechanism, even if for now we only pass
> > register-related information.
> 
> Do you have any examples?

No examples, it was just a general observation.  As long as you say
you keep this is mind, I'm happy.

> Thinking about it now, the parsing could be pushed down into the remote
> protocol implementation, and a C structure returned as a binary blob
> via target_read_partial.

That's what I had in mind, sort of.

> Do you think that would be a better interface to choose?

I think so, but it's an idea based on general principles; I know much
less than you about the remote targets.  So if you find that what I
suggested has any significant drawbacks, I won't insist.