Re: patch for printing 64-bit values in i386 registers; STABS format

Daniel Jacobowitz
2003-04-28T16:15:09Z

On Mon, Apr 28, 2003 at 12:09:53PM -0400, Andrew Cagney wrote:
>
> > It's possible to fix this without adding an architecture method, or
> > implementing location expressions (the penny just dropped). The basic
> > problem is the same as for the MIPS - need a custom register area.
> > Hence:
> >
> > - define a sequence of nameless cooked ([NUM_REGS ..
> > NUM_REGS+NUM_PSEUDO_REGS) range) registers ordered the way stabs would
> > like them
> > - modify the existing stabs_regnum_to_regnum to map the messed up
> > registers onto those values
> >
> >Ugh, Yuck! Yes it works, but isn't this a terrible hack? Oh and
> >using nameless cooked registers means that
> >
> > info address variable
> >
> >no longer prints the right thing if variable lives in a register.
>
> Hmm, so that's the command I can never remember. Fortunatly, I think
> the `unnamed' restriction is removed. They can be named as GDB should
> now be relying on reggroups to determine which registers are valid where.

Nowadays print &variable will do it also.

--
Daniel Jacobowitz
MontaVista Software Debian GNU/Linux Developer