[Dwarf-discuss] What values to use for our own attributes
Fri Mar 10 08:30:54 PST 2006
I talked with Ian Murdock, the new CTO for Free Standards Group, just
yesterday. He showed me a website that they have in development for
the LSB which includes a Wiki and some reasonable content management
support. We talked about converting the Dwarf website over to this
new style. It would seem that a Wiki for registering vendor-specific
extensions would be a pretty easy solution to the need for an extension
We could also add a self-managed producer registry, as well.
Note that it's likely that any vendor extension would be renumbered
when it was adopted into a standard. The impact of that would be
much less than the annoyance of vendor/vendor conflicts.
Ron Brender wrote:
> Any value in a DWARF-defined "vendor-specific area" of a DWARF construct
> is, by its nature, vendor-specific. Which is to say that to properly
> interpret such a value the consumer must take into account the producer
> identified in the unit header. Which is to say that there is no such
> thing as a "conflict" for values in vendor-specific codes (unless the
> producer is confused/inconsistent).
> That said, since there is no published registry to identify producers it
> often feels it would be nice if there were a registry of vendor-specific
> codes that informal cooperation could exploit to minimize re-use of the
> same codes, so that the identity of the producer could be ignored (at
> least usually). So far there is no such registry.
> Could/should there be? Good question. There seems to be enough critical
> mass of DWARF committee participants these days + a formal framework
> (FSO) that perhaps it would make sense to establish such a registry.
> After the initial startup, I would expect on-going administration to be
> relatively low effort.
> Kees Bakker wrote:
>> For our compiler and debugger we need a couple of "user" values
>> in dwarf.h
>> We don't want to get into a situation where we will pick a value
>> and later discover that someone else just picked that same value
>> too. (As did happen, I guess, with some MIPS and HP attributes.)
>> Oh, too late, we already did (DW_ATE_Tasking_fract).
>> Is it enough to just report it to the list here? Or is there a
>> more official procedure?
>> Some values that we have been using lately are:
>> DW_TAG_Tasking_circ_type 0x5101
>> DW_TAG_Tasking_mwa_circ_type 0x5102
>> DW_TAG_Tasking_rev_carry_type 0x5103
>> DW_TAG_Tasking_rom 0x5111
>> DW_AT_Tasking_compat_v2 0x2301
>> DW_ATE_Tasking_fract 0x80 (conflicts with HP)
>> DW_ATE_Tasking_accum 0x81 (conflicts with HP)
>> DW_LANG_Tasking_Assembler 0x9101
>> DW_CC_Tasking_interrupt 0x65
>> DW_CC_Tasking_near_system_stack 0x66
>> DW_CC_Tasking_near_user_stack 0x67
>> DW_CC_Tasking_huge_user_stack 0x68
> Dwarf-discuss mailing list
> Dwarf-discuss at lists.freestandards.org
Michael Eager eager at eagercon.com
1960 Park Blvd., Palo Alto, CA 94306 650-325-8077
More information about the Dwarf-Discuss