Re: [commit] New function gdbarch_infi_fill

[Andrew Cagney <ac131313 at redhat dot com>]

> Should the assertion:
> > 	gdbarch_find_by_info (gdbarch_info (gdbarch)) == gdbarch
> >
> > always hold?  At present architectures like the MIPS make this very hard 
> >  - keying off information found in the BFD and not the corresponding 
> > info struct.
>
>
> This, however, I'd really like.  I remember why I wanted it now.  Take
> a look at the end of osabi.c:set_osabi - I am not especially confident
> that that code works.  It seems to me that the above assertion makes it
> much more likely to work.

Like with "frame_id", it would mean adding some sort of "special" field. 
 That way the MIPS could record that its debugging "o64" but with 
variation #28: sizeof(long) == 8, FPU :-/

It would also make architecture creation more robust vis:

- fill in "gdbarch_info"
Setting osabi et.al. based on the bfd et.al.

- create the architecture from "gdbarch_info"
but with _no_ bfd.

harder to get right, but probably more correct.

Adding to wish list ...

Andrew