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] |
On May 21, 12:17pm, Andrew Cagney wrote:
> This is patch 2 of many more to come. It depends upon
> http://sources.redhat.com/ml/gdb-patches/2003-05/msg00268.html.
> > Okay?
Per my earlier comment, I don't think this one is right. I don't think things like LAST_ARG_REGNUM belong in that cooked/raw reg structure. Instead, they should exist out side it.
If the code really wants to differentiate between the raw and cooked register number, why not use the more explicit:
rawnum->gp0_regnum + tdep->last_arg_regnum
So, last_arg_regnum represents a count of the number of argument registers?
That's fine (at the moment anyway) for the GPRs, but it doesn't work for the FPRs. For o32, I have things arranged so that there are a total of 16 cooked FPRs and 32 raw FPRs. Therefore, argument register counts will be different between cooked vs raw. IMO, it really does make sense to put these values into the cooked/raw structure. I'm having difficulty understanding why you're objecting to this layout.
Kevin
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |