diff --git a/gdb/ChangeLog b/gdb/ChangeLog index 129d505a54..f8342fa46c 100644 --- a/gdb/ChangeLog +++ b/gdb/ChangeLog @@ -1,3 +1,7 @@ +Mon May 15 16:50:45 2000 Andrew Cagney + + * TODO: Add notes on register cache. + Mon May 15 21:27:27 2000 J"orn Rennecke * sh-tdep.c (sh_dsp_reg_names, sh3_dsp_reg_names): New arrays. diff --git a/gdb/TODO b/gdb/TODO index c331e5810a..0a14f0b347 100644 --- a/gdb/TODO +++ b/gdb/TODO @@ -1,11 +1,11 @@ If you find inaccuracies in this list, please send mail to -bug-gdb@prep.ai.mit.edu. If you would like to work on any of these, -you should consider sending mail to the same address, to find out -whether anyone else is working on it. +gdb-patches@sourceware.cygnus.com. If you would like to work on any +of these, you should consider sending mail to the same address, to +find out whether anyone else is working on it. -Known problems in GDB 5.0 -========================= + Known problems in GDB 5.0 + ========================= Below is a list of problems identified during the GDB 5.0 release cycle. People hope to have these problems fixed in a follow-on @@ -193,10 +193,8 @@ Robert Lipe writes: -- - ------------------------------------------------ - -Code cleanups -============= + Code cleanups + ============= The following code cleanups are planned for the follow-on release to GDB 5.0. @@ -314,8 +312,127 @@ options are valid. Need to probably disable warnings by default. -- -General Wish List -================= + General Wish List + ================= + +-- + +Register Cache Cleanup (below from Andrew Cagney) + +I would depict the current register architecture as something like: + + High GDB --> Low GDB + | | + \|/ \|/ + --- REG NR ----- + | + register + REGISTER_BYTE(reg_nr) + | + \|/ + ------------------------- + | extern register[] | + ------------------------- + +where neither the high (valops.c et.al.) or low gdb (*-tdep.c) are +really clear on what mechanisms they should be using to manipulate that +buffer. Further, much code assumes, dangerously, that registers are +contigious. Having got mips-tdep.c to support multiple ABIs, believe +me, that is a bad assumption. Finally, that register cache layout is +determined by the current remote/local target and _not_ the less +specific target ISA. In fact, in many cases it is determined by the +somewhat arbitrary layout of the [gG] packets! + + +How I would like the register file to work is more like: + + + High GDB + | + \|/ + pseudo reg-nr + | + map pseudo <-> + random cache + bytes + | + \|/ + ------------ + | register | + | cache | + ------------ + /|\ + | + map random cache + bytes to target + dependant i-face + /|\ + | + target dependant + such as [gG] packet + or ptrace buffer + +The main objectives being: + + o a clear separation between the low + level target and the high level GDB + + o a mechanism that solves the general + problem of register aliases, overlaps + etc instead of treating them as optional + extras that can be wedged in as an after + thought (that is a reasonable description + of the current code). + + Identify then solve the hard case and the + rest just falls out. GDB solved the easy + case and then tried to ignore the real + world :-) + + o a removal of the assumption that the + mapping between the register cache + and virtual registers is largely static. + If you flip the USR/SSR stack register + select bit in the status-register then + the corresponding stack registers should + reflect the change. + + o a mechanism that clearly separates the + gdb internal register cache from any + target (not architecture) dependant + specifics such as [gG] packets. + +Of course, like anything, it sounds good in theory. In reality, it +would have to contend with many<->many relationships at both the +virt<->cache and cache<->target level. For instance: + + virt<->cache + Modifying an mmx register may involve + scattering values across both FP and + mmpx specific parts of a buffer + + cache<->target + When writing back a SP it may need to + both be written to both SP and USP. + + +Hmm, + +Rather than let this like the last time it was discussed, just slip, I'm +first going to add this e-mail (+ references) to TODO. I'd then like to +sketch out a broad strategy I think could get us there. + + +First thing I'd suggest is separating out the ``extern registers[]'' +code so that we can at least identify what is using it. At present +things are scattered across many files. That way we can at least +pretend that there is a cache instead of a global array :-) + +I'd then suggest someone putting up a proposal for the pseudo-reg / +high-level side interface so that code can be adopted to it. For old +code, initially a blanket rename of write_register_bytes() to +deprecated_write_register_bytes() would help. + +Following that would, finaly be the corresponding changes to the target. -- @@ -328,8 +445,20 @@ to GDB.. Anyone interested in learning how to write tests? :-) -- -This list is probably not up to date, and opinions vary about the -importance or even desirability of some of the items. +Add support for Modula3 + +Get DEC/Compaq to contribute their Modula-3 support. + +-- + + Legacy Wish List + ================ + +This list is not up to date, and opinions vary about the importance or +even desirability of some of the items. If you do fix something, it +always pays to check the below. + +-- Document trace machinery.