From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gdb-patches-return-11092-listarch-gdb-patches=sourceware.cygnus.com@sources.redhat.com>
Received: (qmail 11146 invoked by alias); 5 Dec 2001 22:53:45 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gdb-patches-subscribe@sources.redhat.com>
List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/gdb-patches/>
List-Post: <mailto:gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com>
List-Help: <mailto:gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sources.redhat.com
Received: (qmail 10421 invoked from network); 5 Dec 2001 22:52:26 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO cygnus.com) (205.180.230.5)
  by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 5 Dec 2001 22:52:26 -0000
Received: from cse.cygnus.com (cse.cygnus.com [205.180.230.236])
	by runyon.cygnus.com (8.8.7-cygnus/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA27933;
	Wed, 5 Dec 2001 14:52:19 -0800 (PST)
Received: (from kev@localhost)
	by cse.cygnus.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id PAA06007;
	Wed, 5 Dec 2001 15:51:48 -0700
Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2001 14:53:00 -0000
From: Kevin Buettner <kevinb@redhat.com>
Message-Id: <1011205225148.ZM6006@ocotillo.lan>
In-Reply-To: Elena Zannoni <ezannoni@cygnus.com>
        "Re: [RFA] config/rs6000/tm-rs6000.h STAB_REG_TO_REGNUM" (Dec  5,  5:31pm)
References: <15367.50385.770078.559327@krustylu.cygnus.com> 
	<3C07CD1A.4010403@cygnus.com> 
	<15367.63139.561172.481628@krustylu.cygnus.com> 
	<1011205215641.ZM5797@ocotillo.lan> 
	<15374.41016.151518.113014@krustylu.cygnus.com>
X-Mailer: Z-Mail (4.0.1 13Jan97 Caldera)
To: Elena Zannoni <ezannoni@cygnus.com>, Kevin Buettner <kevinb@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [RFA] config/rs6000/tm-rs6000.h STAB_REG_TO_REGNUM
Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com, vmakarov@redhat.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-SW-Source: 2001-12/txt/msg00159.txt.bz2

On Dec 5,  5:31pm, Elena Zannoni wrote:

>  > > +    case 64: /* mq */
>  > > +      if (TARGET_ARCHITECTURE->mach == bfd_mach_ppc_601)
>  > > +	regnum = 124;
>  > 
>  > Hmm... I wish we had a symbolic constant for this one.  (It took me
>  > a while to figure out why this register number was different.)
> 
> Hmmm, should these regnums be part of the gdbarch_tdep structure?
> That's how I did it for the SH. (Defined to -1 if not applicable) It
> seems to me that not all the variants have register (say, for
> instance) 67 defined to be the LR register or even exist. This way we
> could also do error checking in this routine.

I had occassion to look at SH recently and saw how you did things.  I
think the mechanism you propose would be appropriate for PPC too.

Kevin