From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 11719 invoked by alias); 18 May 2002 11:38:03 -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 11700 invoked from network); 18 May 2002 11:38:00 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO fw-cam.cambridge.arm.com) (193.131.176.3) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 18 May 2002 11:38:00 -0000 Received: by fw-cam.cambridge.arm.com; id MAA12687; Sat, 18 May 2002 12:37:59 +0100 (BST) Received: from unknown(172.16.1.2) by fw-cam.cambridge.arm.com via smap (V5.5) id xma012560; Sat, 18 May 02 12:37:04 +0100 Received: from cam-mail2.cambridge.arm.com (cam-mail2.cambridge.arm.com [172.16.1.91]) by cam-admin0.cambridge.arm.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id MAA13268; Sat, 18 May 2002 12:37:04 +0100 (BST) Received: from sun18.cambridge.arm.com (sun18.cambridge.arm.com [172.16.2.18]) by cam-mail2.cambridge.arm.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id MAA28231; Sat, 18 May 2002 12:37:03 +0100 (BST) Message-Id: <200205181137.MAA28231@cam-mail2.cambridge.arm.com> To: Andrew Cagney cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com, Richard.Earnshaw@arm.com Reply-To: Richard.Earnshaw@arm.com Organization: ARM Ltd. X-Telephone: +44 1223 400569 (direct+voicemail), +44 1223 400400 (switchbd) X-Fax: +44 1223 400410 X-Address: ARM Ltd., 110 Fulbourn Road, Cherry Hinton, Cambridge CB1 9NJ. X-Url: http://www.arm.com/ Subject: Re: [wip/cagney_regbuf-20020515-branch] Introduce regcache_move() In-reply-to: Your message of "Sat, 18 May 2002 12:17:33 BST." <200205181117.MAA27270@cam-mail2.cambridge.arm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Sat, 18 May 2002 04:38:00 -0000 From: Richard Earnshaw X-SW-Source: 2002-05/txt/msg00782.txt.bz2 rearnsha@arm.com said: > Write_register_bytes will then overwrite the raw value in the cache > without any regard to the masking operations that should be occuring > when updating R15; the CPSR bits in the PC are just clobbered and we > are left with a broken value in the R15 register. Actually, this isn't a strict description of what happens (though the result is pretty much the same). What really happens is that write_register_byte will then call write_register_gen for each register that returns a REGISTER_BYTE() address in the same range. The result is that write_register_bytes calls write_register_gen(PC, newval) write_register_gen(CPSR, newval) which is still equally bogus. R.