On Fri, 25 Jan 2013 13:51:14 +0100 Andreas Färber <afaer...@suse.de> wrote:
> Am 25.01.2013 13:14, schrieb Luiz Capitulino: > > On Thu, 24 Jan 2013 13:12:08 -0500 > > Peter Feiner <pe...@gridcentric.ca> wrote: > > > >>> What about converting 'info registers' to QMP (ie. having > >>> query-cpu-registers)? > >> > >> We had thought about it, but we decided to go with this lower hanging fruit > >> because it provides immediately useful functionality at a low > >> implementation > >> cost. It's harder (for us) to think of why would anyone want to know XMM12 > >> or > >> r10 in the general case outside of gdb, which is already supported. > > > > For the same reason you need the other registers now. Besides, it would be > > nice to allow GUIs to have more debug info like this. > > > > Let me re-state the problem for the CC'ed people: you're adding x86 control > > registers to the query-cpus command. I think this has a few problems: > > > > 1. Won't "scale", as query-cpus will become a huge mess if people start > > doing this for other archs > > > > 2. query-cpus is bad designed. I'd prefer adding new commands instead of > > extending it (unless the information is general enough) > > > > 3. It's very desirable to have registers info in QMP > > > > The obvious suggestion is to add query-cpu-registers. I understand this has > > a > > few problems (see questions below), but I think the following incremental > > approach could work: > > > > 1. Add a CPURegisters union > > 2. Each CPU arch is added as a type to the union (eg. CPUX86Registers) > > 3. query-cpu-registers returns the union > > 4. Move do_info_registers() to hmp.c as hmp_info_registers() > > 5. Change hmp_info_registers() to first call qmp_query_cpu_registers(), if > > this returns the CPU arch it expects, then print it. Otherwise fallback > > to cpu_dump_state() > > > > You start by adding CPUX86Registers. Other CPUs are added as needed. > > > > What do the CC'ed people think? > > I wonder why this needs to be a custom QMP command? It doesn't. I just forgot about QOM when responding to the original email. See my last email to this thread.
