labath accepted this revision.
labath added a comment.
This revision is now accepted and ready to land.

Seems reasonable. I think the names like `m_read_all_at_once` and 
`ReadAllRegisters` will now be somewhat confusing. Maybe it would be worth (in 
a separate patch) renaming them to something which does not include "all" in 
the name.
Maybe we could use `m_use_g_packet_for_reading/writing` instead of 
`m_read/write_all_at_once`. I'm not sure what would be a good name for 
`ReadAllRegisters`... Gdb docs describe the `g` packet as "Read general 
registers" so maybe just `ReadGeneralRegisters` with some comment that this may 
in fact include all of them?


CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D97498/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D97498

_______________________________________________
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
  • [Lldb-commits] [PAT... Muhammad Omair Javaid via Phabricator via lldb-commits
    • [Lldb-commits]... Pavel Labath via Phabricator via lldb-commits
    • [Lldb-commits]... Muhammad Omair Javaid via Phabricator via lldb-commits

Reply via email to