Re: [PATCH] Undeprecate GNU/Hurd

[Mark Kettenis <kettenis@chello.nl>]

   Date: Sun, 08 Aug 2004 10:32:17 -0400
   From: Andrew Cagney <cagney@gnu.org>

   > @@ -268,15 +266,15 @@ gnu_store_registers (int regno)
   >  	  proc_debug (thread, "storing all registers");
   >  
   >  	  for (i = 0; i < I386_NUM_GREGS; i++)
   > -	    if (deprecated_register_valid[i])
   > -	      fill (state, i);
   > +	    if (regcache_valid_p (regcache, i))
   > +	      regcache_raw_supply (regcache, i, REG_ADDR (state, i));
   >  	}
   >        else

   Should this, and a few others, be ``collect''?  Supplying an already 
   valid register doesn't seem logical :-)

Ouch.  Thanks for spotting this one.  Fixed by the attached patch.
There is one instance where regcache_raw_supply is correct in that
function.


Index: ChangeLog
from  Mark Kettenis  <kettenis@gnu.org>
 
	* i386gnu-nat.c (gnu_store_registers): Use regcache_raw_collect
	instead of regcache_raw_supply when storing the registers.

Index: i386gnu-nat.c
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvs/src/src/gdb/i386gnu-nat.c,v
retrieving revision 1.20
diff -u -p -r1.20 i386gnu-nat.c
--- i386gnu-nat.c 8 Aug 2004 12:50:37 -0000 1.20
+++ i386gnu-nat.c 8 Aug 2004 14:59:47 -0000
@@ -267,14 +267,14 @@ gnu_store_registers (int regno)
 
 	  for (i = 0; i < I386_NUM_GREGS; i++)
 	    if (regcache_valid_p (regcache, i))
-	      regcache_raw_supply (regcache, i, REG_ADDR (state, i));
+	      regcache_raw_collect (regcache, i, REG_ADDR (state, i));
 	}
       else
 	{
 	  proc_debug (thread, "storing register %s", REGISTER_NAME (regno));
 
 	  gdb_assert (regcache_valid_p (regcache, regno));
-	  regcache_raw_supply (regcache, regno, REG_ADDR (state, regno));
+	  regcache_craw_collect (regcache, regno, REG_ADDR (state, regno));
 	}
 
       /* Restore the T bit.  */