From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 21291 invoked by alias); 1 Jan 2005 12:31:17 -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 21133 invoked from network); 1 Jan 2005 12:31:06 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO smtp8.wanadoo.fr) (193.252.22.23) by sourceware.org with SMTP; 1 Jan 2005 12:31:06 -0000 Received: from me-wanadoo.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mwinf0806.wanadoo.fr (SMTP Server) with SMTP id 058871C0009F for ; Sat, 1 Jan 2005 13:31:06 +0100 (CET) Received: from takamaka.act-europe.fr (AStDenis-103-1-2-247.w81-249.abo.wanadoo.fr [81.249.112.247]) by mwinf0806.wanadoo.fr (SMTP Server) with ESMTP id 9D7521C00097 for ; Sat, 1 Jan 2005 13:31:05 +0100 (CET) Received: by takamaka.act-europe.fr (Postfix, from userid 507) id B99EA47DAD; Sat, 1 Jan 2005 16:31:02 +0400 (RET) Date: Sat, 01 Jan 2005 12:31:00 -0000 From: Joel Brobecker To: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [RFA/pa-risc] Correct incorrect frame base Message-ID: <20050101123102.GP1824@adacore.com> References: <20041231151415.GL1824@adacore.com> <20041231161258.GA4437@nevyn.them.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20041231161258.GA4437@nevyn.them.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i X-SW-Source: 2005-01/txt/msg00000.txt.bz2 > On Fri, Dec 31, 2004 at 07:14:15PM +0400, Joel Brobecker wrote: > > There is a small confusion in the source register for the addil > > instruction. The actual sequence should be > > > > addil high21,%r30 > > ldo low11(%r1),%r30 > > > > I think the confusion comes from the fact that the result of > > the sum is stored in %r1. > > "addil ,%r30" sets %r1 and not %r30? Yes. "addil high21,%rn" adds high21 to register n, and then always stores the results in r1. > Whose bright idea was that, anyway? :-) > > 2004-12-31 Joel Brobecker > > > > * hppa-tdep.c (prologue_inst_adjust_sp): Fix small confusion > > in register number for ldil instruction. > > > > Tested on HP/UX 11.00, no regression. > > OK to apply? > > OK. Typo in the changelog: that's addil, not ldil, isn't it? Good catch, sorry for the confusion. Fixed and checked in. Thank you! -- Joel