From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gdb-patches-return-39671-listarch-gdb-patches=sources.redhat.com@sources.redhat.com>
Received: (qmail 15052 invoked by alias); 27 May 2005 10:34:00 -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 15028 invoked by uid 22791); 27 May 2005 10:33:52 -0000
Received: from alg145.algor.co.uk (HELO dmz.algor.co.uk) (62.254.210.145)
    by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.30-dev) with ESMTP; Fri, 27 May 2005 10:33:52 +0000
Received: from alg158.algor.co.uk ([62.254.210.158] helo=olympia.mips.com)
	by dmz.algor.co.uk with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian))
	id 1DbcSe-0008H5-00; Fri, 27 May 2005 11:53:04 +0100
Received: from stockwell.mips.com ([192.168.192.238])
	by olympia.mips.com with esmtp (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian))
	id 1Dbc9s-0003jG-00; Fri, 27 May 2005 11:33:40 +0100
Subject: Re: [patch ping] MIPS32 / MIPS64 release 2 support in simulator
From: David Ung <davidu@mips.com>
To: cgd@broadcom.com
Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
In-Reply-To: <yov5ll61oens.fsf@xl-sj1-03.sj.broadcom.com>
References: <1099495559.2778.53.camel@stockwell.mips.com>
	 <mailpost.1099495587.2562@news-sj1-1>
	 <yov5zn1yzx90.fsf@ldt-sj3-010.sj.broadcom.com>
	 <mailpost.1099501062.5136@news-sj1-1>
	 <yov5d5yuojo4.fsf@xl-sj1-01.sj.broadcom.com>
	 <1099576389.2778.90.camel@stockwell.mips.com>
	 <mailpost.1099576418.9773@news-sj1-1>
	 <yov51xf98q2l.fsf@xl-sj1-03.sj.broadcom.com> <418FA243.4060507@gnu.org>
	 <1099937194.2780.151.camel@stockwell.mips.com> <4190EC00.6070501@gnu.org>
	 <yov5vfcff0v6.fsf@xl-sj1-04.sj.broadcom.com> <4190F770.70006@gnu.org>
	 <yov5actqrkih.fsf@xl-sj1-04.sj.broadcom.com>
	 <1101316048.29221.240.camel@stockwell.mips.com>
	 <yov5brdnt8mw.fsf@xl-sj1-01.sj.broadcom.com>
	 <1116433763.1623.257.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	 <yov5k6lwmfjs.fsf@xl-sj1-03.sj.broadcom.com>
	 <mailpost.1116450142.2303@news-sj1-1>
	 <yov5sm0cwbtz.fsf@xl-sj1-03.sj.broadcom.com>
	 <yov5ll61oens.fsf@xl-sj1-03.sj.broadcom.com>
Content-Type: text/plain
Date: Fri, 27 May 2005 14:38:00 -0000
Message-Id: <1117190020.1627.413.camel@localhost.localdomain>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-MTUK-Scanner: Found to be clean
X-MTUK-SpamCheck: not spam (whitelisted), SpamAssassin (score=-4.844,
	required 4, AWL, BAYES_00)
X-SW-Source: 2005-05/txt/msg00574.txt.bz2

On Thu, 2005-05-26 at 14:33 -0700, cgd@broadcom.com wrote:
> At 24 May 2005 14:31:04 -0700, Chris G. Demetriou wrote:
> > just so you know i haven't forgotten: I'm trying to do do a basic
> > build + sanity check of these changes Right Now.
> 
> I've just checked them in.

thanks.

> I reformatted your changelog a bit to be more like the normal GNU
> style.  (I figured it'd be really, really poor form to ask you to do
> that.  8-)

The less change I have to make, the better it is for me..  ;)

> i tested them by finding a version of gcc which would builds
> mipsisa64-elf, and checking before and after.  I.e., i checked to see
> that the MIPS64 code wasn't broken, but didn't check the
> MIPS32r4/MIPS64r2 code.
> 
> I figure you'll be doing that regularly.

yes.  We ran mips32r2 checks regularly but not mips64r2.  We do check
mips64 though.

David.