From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 13084 invoked by alias); 2 Jan 2004 23:12:37 -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 13075 invoked from network); 2 Jan 2004 23:12:35 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO public.ninemoons.com) (68.14.214.218) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 2 Jan 2004 23:12:35 -0000 Received: from 192.168.1.129 (wsip-68-14-214-217.ph.ph.cox.net [68.14.214.217]) by public.ninemoons.com (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id i02NBowG024840; Fri, 2 Jan 2004 16:11:51 -0700 From: Fred Fish Reply-To: fnf@ninemoons.com To: Andrew Cagney , Daniel Jacobowitz Subject: Re: [PATCH] Remove some hardwired assumptions about register sets Date: Fri, 02 Jan 2004 23:12:00 -0000 User-Agent: KMail/1.5.4 Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com, fnf@ninemoons.com References: <200312170614.hBH6Ebtl003033@fred.ninemoons.com> <20031223020339.GA13570@nevyn.them.org> <3FF5C642.3000504@gnu.org> In-Reply-To: <3FF5C642.3000504@gnu.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200401021611.11737.fnf@ninemoons.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2004-01/txt/msg00036.txt.bz2 > Daniel, the patch adds a global variable "num_mips_processor_regs" We could use a new "tdep->num_mips_processor_regs" variable instead. That is probably cleaner anyway. > I'm wondering what motivated the change? > ... sidestep the issue > ... made all the arrays the same size. The problem is the assumption that all the arrays are the same size, or perhaps more fundamentally, that "all mips architectures will have registers sets of similar size'. I'm working on port, which will soon be contributed, that currently adds 384 new register names (reg numbers 32-415) for a matrix coprocessor (cop 2). When contributed though the names will be reduced to just 69 new names (32-100). The original port assigned separate register names to each of the individual 256 matrix elements (16 vectors of 16 elements) instead of handling each 16 element vector as a single named vector register. Still, even with 69 new names, it gets really ugly having all the other *_reg_name[] arrays have to be full of mostly null strings. -Fred