This is the mail archive of the gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com mailing list for the GDB project.
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |
Other format: | [Raw text] |
Andrew Cagney wrote:> > I think the stashing of constants into the tdep structure is basically > wrong. You separate the register names arrays from the literals > that describe their positions, and you replicate the literals > up to four times. The tdep structure and the sh_gdbarch_init > function are so large that you have lost track of the things that > really belong in tdep, like sh_show_regs, skip_prologue_hard_way, > and do_pseudo_register. If you look at other gdb ports, you'll > see that they put only variable stuff in tdep, and use enums > for constants. The sh gdb register naming scheme also doesn't > scale well, the names are again duplicated multiple times.Can i suggest comparing the SH with the MIPS or RS6000.
If it happened once it would be an accident.MIPS and RS6000 use varying register numbers for hardware registers with identical name and function. I suppose that is due to historical accident?
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |