Re: [RFA] New bitflags type and eflags on i386/x86-64

[Mark Kettenis <kettenis@chello.nl>]

   Date: Thu, 05 Sep 2002 10:04:11 +0200
   From: Michal Ludvig <mludvig@suse.cz>

   Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
   > On Tue, Sep 03, 2002 at 11:17:43AM +0200, Michal Ludvig wrote:
   >>Thanks for help. Attached file incorporates your patch as well. Could 
   >>anyone approve it, please?
   > 
   > Can't approve it, but I like it.  Thanks for following this through.

   Who can approve? Andrew? MarkK? Someone else?

Well, I'm not too happy about the introduction of i386-common-tdep.c.
I mean, those functions belong in i386-tdep.c.  Can we postpone
integrating this patch until I've unified the i386 and x86-64 targets
into one truly multi-arched one?  I've started working on that now,
honestly :-).

Anyway, before approving this I'd like to see a bit more consensus
about the BitFlags type your patch introduces.  Andrew, is it OK with
you now?

There also some coding-style problems with your code:

Index: gdbtypes.c
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvs/src/src/gdb/gdbtypes.c,v
retrieving revision 1.56
diff -u -p -r1.56 gdbtypes.c
--- gdbtypes.c	20 Aug 2002 19:57:32 -0000	1.56
+++ gdbtypes.c	30 Aug 2002 13:42:50 -0000
@@ -782,6 +782,61 @@ create_set_type (struct type *result_typ
   return (result_type);
 }
 
+/*
+ * - The following three functions are intended to be used for BitFlags 
+ *   types (e.g. i386's EFLAGS register).
+ * - A BitFlags type is an integer where bits may have a symbolic name 
+ *   to be printed when the bit is set.
+ * - Printing is done in <lang>_val_print() under a TYPE_CODE_FLAGS label.
+ * - Add symbolic names for relevant bits using add_flag_name() after
+ *   initializing the BitFlags type.
+ */

That's not the right comment style.

+void
+add_flag_ignore (struct type *type, int bitpos)
+{
+	TYPE_FIELD_BITPOS (type, bitpos) = -1;
+}

Indentation is wrong here...

+void
+add_flag_name (struct type *type, int bitpos, char *name)
+{
+	int namelen;
+	
+	gdb_assert (TYPE_CODE (type) == TYPE_CODE_FLAGS);
+	gdb_assert (bitpos < TYPE_NFIELDS (type));
+	gdb_assert (bitpos >= 0);
+	
+	namelen=strlen(name)+1;
+	TYPE_FIELD_NAME (type, bitpos) = xmalloc (namelen);
+	snprintf(TYPE_FIELD_NAME (type, bitpos), namelen, "%s", name);	
+
+	TYPE_FIELD_BITPOS (type, bitpos) = bitpos;
+}

...and here.

+struct type *
+init_flags_type (int bitlength, char *name, struct objfile *objfile)
+{
+  register struct type *type;

We're trying to get rid of "register".

Index: gdbtypes.h
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvs/src/src/gdb/gdbtypes.h,v
retrieving revision 1.35
diff -u -p -r1.35 gdbtypes.h
--- gdbtypes.h	10 Aug 2002 05:12:40 -0000	1.35
+++ gdbtypes.h	30 Aug 2002 13:42:51 -0000
@@ -1054,6 +1056,14 @@ extern struct type *alloc_type (struct o
 
 extern struct type *init_type (enum type_code, int, int, char *,
 			       struct objfile *);
+
+/* Helper functions to construct BitField type.  
+   See description in gdbarch.c for details.  */

Are you sure this reference to gdbarch.c is still correct?

Mark