Re: [patch/wip] Save/restore cooked registers

[Kevin Buettner <kevinb at redhat dot com>]

On Aug 26,  2:23pm, Elena Zannoni wrote:

>  > If I'm not mistaken, the pseudos on the e500 are synthesized from the
>  > raw registers without the need for outside sources such as memory. 
>  > That being the case, saving the raw registers (or, more precisely, the
>  > cooked registers corresponding to the raw registers) should be
>  > sufficient.
> 
> Yes. I was thinking about this other problem I encountered:
> http://sources.redhat.com/ml/gdb-patches/2002-08/msg00689.html

I see.

>  > In fact, for the e500, I think we'll need to take care NOT to write
>  > back the pseudos since this could potentially cause information to
>  > be lost.  It would depend upon the order in which things were done.
>  > If the pseudos are restored after the raw registers that they map
>  > onto, the most significant bits would likely be wiped out.  (In this
>  > case the pseudos are narrower than the raw registers, right?)
>  > 
> 
> The pseudo register write function is written so that it preserves the
> upper bits. If you use that technique you should be safe.

Okay, good.  (I was concerned that we might need e500-specific iterators
when Andrew commits his patch.  But I guess we won't...)

Kevin