From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 17887 invoked by alias); 13 Oct 2005 01:04:16 -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 17860 invoked by uid 22791); 13 Oct 2005 01:04:14 -0000 Received: from nevyn.them.org (HELO nevyn.them.org) (66.93.172.17) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.30-dev) with ESMTP; Thu, 13 Oct 2005 01:04:14 +0000 Received: from drow by nevyn.them.org with local (Exim 4.52) id 1EPrVz-0001S0-VT; Wed, 12 Oct 2005 21:04:12 -0400 Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2005 01:04:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: Jim Blandy Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: RFA: general prologue analysis framework Message-ID: <20051013010411.GA5540@nevyn.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: Jim Blandy , gdb-patches@sourceware.org References: <20051009202726.GE7107@nevyn.them.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.8i X-SW-Source: 2005-10/txt/msg00116.txt.bz2 On Wed, Oct 12, 2005 at 05:19:27PM -0700, Jim Blandy wrote: > > This all screams out to me that we ought to be able to generate most of > > the target-specific bits from cgen or somehow reuse existing simulator > > interfaces. Now that'd be extra credit. > > *Exactly*. Machine-independent prologue analysis! If we had a > machine description in CSDL or something like that, writing the > prologue analyzer would probably require little more than indicating > which instructions you wanted to recognize. That's precisely my point: it's set up the other way round right now. That calls for an interface in which common code logic calls out to tdep code to process individual instructions, which is quite the opposite way round from the target-analyzer-uses-utility-functions that we've got here. But I haven't looked at the M32C example yet; I will do that. -- Daniel Jacobowitz CodeSourcery, LLC