From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 28998 invoked by alias); 14 Jun 2005 17:40:29 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 28957 invoked by uid 22791); 14 Jun 2005 17:40:24 -0000 Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (66.187.233.31) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.30-dev) with ESMTP; Tue, 14 Jun 2005 17:40:24 +0000 Received: from int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (int-mx1.corp.redhat.com [172.16.52.254]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id j5EHeNkC002147 for ; Tue, 14 Jun 2005 13:40:23 -0400 Received: from potter.sfbay.redhat.com (potter.sfbay.redhat.com [172.16.27.15]) by int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id j5EHeKu12802; Tue, 14 Jun 2005 13:40:20 -0400 Received: from dzur.sfbay.redhat.com (dzur.sfbay.redhat.com [172.16.24.94]) by potter.sfbay.redhat.com (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id j5EHeDWM025184; Tue, 14 Jun 2005 13:40:14 -0400 Subject: Re: [patch] MIPS16e support in simulator. From: Eric Christopher To: David Ung Cc: Daniel Jacobowitz , binutils@sourceware.org, gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com In-Reply-To: <1118747270.1621.757.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <1118335933.1627.639.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20050613031833.GG9288@nevyn.them.org> <1118682165.5119.0.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20050613170353.GA19310@nevyn.them.org> <1118704956.5119.68.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1118747270.1621.757.camel@localhost.localdomain> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Tue, 14 Jun 2005 17:40:00 -0000 Message-Id: <1118770811.3242.11.camel@dzur.sfbay.redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2005-06/txt/msg00181.txt.bz2 > > > > Looks like the jump instructions aren't executing the instructions in > > the delay slot? See the definition of jalr in m16.igen. > > This is correct. The MIPS16e jrc, jalrc etc does not have a delay slot. > OK. The docs I have don't call this out explicitly in the instruction description and probably should given that other mips (and mips16) instructions have delay slots. > > > > I guess a good question would be asking how this patch was tested? > > > > Otherwise it looks fine. > > We've actually had MIPS16e simulator support for quite awhile at MIPS > for our internal use. We've been doing nightly regressions test on > MIPS16e for gcc 3.4 and gdb for more that half year now. You should say that sort of thing when you submit patches, e.g.: "Tested on mips-elf using internal mips16e port. No regressions." or some such. -eric