From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 26188 invoked by alias); 30 Nov 2004 16:44:18 -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 26155 invoked from network); 30 Nov 2004 16:44:07 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO arwen.tausq.org) (64.81.244.109) by sourceware.org with SMTP; 30 Nov 2004 16:44:07 -0000 Received: by arwen.tausq.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 1C7426BD3F; Tue, 30 Nov 2004 08:44:02 -0800 (PST) Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 16:44:00 -0000 From: Randolph Chung To: Andrew Cagney Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [patch/RFA] multiarch INSTRUCTION_NULLIFIED Message-ID: <20041130164401.GV6359@tausq.org> Reply-To: Randolph Chung References: <20041118162108.GK15714@tausq.org> <200411181655.iAIGthDa026050@juw15.nfra.nl> <20041123174937.GL9148@tausq.org> <41AA09F8.4020006@gnu.org> <20041128184141.GG6359@tausq.org> <41AA2D08.3030304@gnu.org> <20041129033013.GJ6359@tausq.org> <41AB3C1D.80509@gnu.org> <20041130065620.GT6359@tausq.org> <41AC88B2.5070501@gnu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <41AC88B2.5070501@gnu.org> X-GPG: for GPG key, see http://www.tausq.org/gpg.txt User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.6+20040722i X-SW-Source: 2004-11/txt/msg00535.txt.bz2 In reference to a message from Andrew Cagney, dated Nov 30: > Randolph Chung wrote: > >>If you want, add a DEPRECATED_INSTRUCTION_NULLIFIED to the architecture > >>vector and have the PA-RISC use that. While a sideways step, it lets > >>you advance what I'm assuming is the more immediate objective of > >>cleaning out PA's tm*.h files and making it pure multi-arch. > > > > > >well, based on Mark's earlier ok i had checked in the > >instruction_nullified stuff already. since this doesn't seem to be ok, > >let me try to fix this properly and see what happens. > > I don't know why Mark did that, this one is certainly ``tricky'' :-) > Just rename it. well, first i want to understand the problem. because i'm still not yet 100% convinced that step_through_delay will work. simply using the "instruction_nullified" method in hppa-tdep as the "step_through_delay" method certainly is not working... randolph -- Randolph Chung Debian GNU/Linux Developer, hppa/ia64 ports http://www.tausq.org/