labath added a comment. In D91241#2391156 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D91241#2391156>, @omjavaid wrote:
> I guess GDB standard does enforce ascending order, here is what it says about > regnum: > > "The register’s number. If omitted, a register’s number is one greater than > that of the previous register (either in the current feature or in a > preceding feature); the first register in the target description defaults to > zero. This register number is used to read or write the register; e.g. it is > used in the remote p and P packets, and registers appear in the g and G > packets in order of increasing register number." > > https://sourceware.org/gdb/current/onlinedocs/gdb/Target-Description-Format.html I've just read that paragraph before writing that, but that's not how I would interpret it. What I think that says is: - in the `g` packet, registers appear in the increasing register number order. (I think we agree on that part) - **if the register number is omitted**, the registers are assigned increasing register numbers. Here, I think the bold part is very important, as it means the rest of the sentence describes default/fallback behavior. If the stub specifies the register number explicitly, then I'd say it's free to send order the register descriptions any way it likes. It can even combine things and set explicit numbers for some register, but not others... CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D91241/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D91241 _______________________________________________ lldb-commits mailing list lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
