This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sourceware.org
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: [PATCH] Fix alignment of disassemble /r
- From: Doug Evans <dje at google dot com>
- To: Daniel Gutson <daniel dot gutson at tallertechnologies dot com>
- Cc: Yao Qi <yao at codesourcery dot com>, gdb-patches <gdb-patches at sourceware dot org>
- Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2014 09:27:09 -0700
- Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix alignment of disassemble /r
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <CAF5HaEUBbK4d2reSxUpUQwp7Zt_KjcpNC_nbUrMHRb0yNo9wtw at mail dot gmail dot com> <534F294D dot 4050907 at codesourcery dot com> <CAF5HaEUqppN8vLXnv5spG4WbWA0eNCQ1OybBNsM3ceTJDivrxw at mail dot gmail dot com>
On Thu, Apr 17, 2014 at 7:37 AM, Daniel Gutson
<daniel.gutson@tallertechnologies.com> wrote:
> So what if I add a new configuration variable, such as
> set disassemble-raw-alignment
> with "off" as default, and if set to on, pad to gdbarch_max_insn_length ?
Presumably some frontends will do their own alignment.
If we went with disassemble-raw-alignment, a boolean value won't help
x86 much, it's either no alignment or (in general) too much
whitespace.
An improvement would be a value from min-insn-length to
max-insn-length, but that would be problematic in a multi-arch
debugging scenario.
If we could agree on some minimum alignment for each variable-length
ISA (5 would be fine for me for x86) then maybe a boolean value could
be useful ("off" = no alignment, "on" = employ arch-specific minimum).
OTOH, what if we made two passes over the instructions, with the first
pass computing the maximum instruction length that is present?
[And maybe only doing this for CLI.]