This is the mail archive of the
gdb@sourceware.cygnus.com
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: Proposal for handling large numbers of registers
- To: m.hayes@elec.canterbury.ac.nz
- Subject: Re: Proposal for handling large numbers of registers
- From: Stan Shebs <shebs@cygnus.com>
- Date: Mon, 9 Aug 1999 15:49:03 -0700
- CC: jtc@redback.com, gdb@sourceware.cygnus.com
Date: Sat, 07 Aug 1999 13:26:45 +1200 (NZST)
From: Michael Hayes <m.hayes@elec.canterbury.ac.nz>
J.T. Conklin writes:
> I'm not sure that a compilers notion of register classes make sense
> for debugging and vice versa. For debugging, broad categories like
> "integer registers", "floating point registers", "system registers"
> seem to be most appropriate; while compilers think of classes like
> "registers that can be used for indexing", "special register used
> for integer divide instructions", etc.
For most targets I have looked at, these other classes you mention are
usually sub-classes of the "integer registers", "fp registers", etc.
However, I can see from most user's perspectives that they will not be
interested in these special sub-classes.
Plus which compilers don't usually have any information about special
or system registers, not least because that part of the register set
may vary wildly among members of a family.
Certainly it would be cool to have some sort of abstract architectural
description that could be crunched into compiler and debugger support
code, but we're a ways away from it (it's pretty hard to do too; I
tackled that one in grad school ten years ago, with limited success).
Stan