From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 26502 invoked by alias); 3 Sep 2002 19:34:47 -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 26487 invoked from network); 3 Sep 2002 19:34:47 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO dr-evil.shagadelic.org) (208.176.2.174) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 3 Sep 2002 19:34:47 -0000 Received: by dr-evil.shagadelic.org (Postfix, from userid 7518) id E70299869; Tue, 3 Sep 2002 12:34:46 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 03 Sep 2002 12:34:00 -0000 From: Jason R Thorpe To: Richard.Earnshaw@arm.com Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [PATCH/RFA] arm-netbsdelf cross-debugging fixes Message-ID: <20020903123446.N12843@dr-evil.shagadelic.org> Mail-Followup-To: Jason R Thorpe , Richard.Earnshaw@arm.com, gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com References: <20020901165843.B4034@dr-evil.shagadelic.org> <200209031923.g83JN2109855@pc960.cambridge.arm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i In-Reply-To: <200209031923.g83JN2109855@pc960.cambridge.arm.com>; from rearnsha@cambridge.arm.com on Tue, Sep 03, 2002 at 08:23:01PM +0100 Organization: Wasabi Systems, Inc. X-SW-Source: 2002-09/txt/msg00039.txt.bz2 On Tue, Sep 03, 2002 at 08:23:01PM +0100, Richard Earnshaw wrote: > Hmm, evil thought. If I said 'no' then perhaps you'd have to go > multi-arch the solib code.... > > No, couldn't be that mean :-) I'm happy to try and do that at some point ... but not right now :-) (I'd like to get this fixed up for 5.3, and won't have much time for any major GDB projects until after the upcoming Intel Developer Forum, at the very least...) > > * Split a 26-bit R15 into PC and a 32-bit-format PSR. > > > > * Take a PC and a 32-bit-format PSR and combine them back > > into a 26-bit R15. > > This is going to conflict horribly with my WIP for using cooked registers. > Is there any chance it can be separated out, or made less invasive? I can put it in armnbsd-tdep.c and make it static, if you want. I only put it in the generic arm-tdep.c because it seemed like a function of general utility. Would that be okay? > Yep, that would be a good move, but it would be easier to say yes if it > were a separate patch. Ok, I'll move the 26bit_r15 stuff into a different file, and submit this patch again separately. -- -- Jason R. Thorpe