From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 4725 invoked by alias); 10 Oct 2007 09:07:19 -0000 Received: (qmail 4665 invoked by uid 22791); 10 Oct 2007 09:07:17 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from sibelius.xs4all.nl (HELO brahms.sibelius.xs4all.nl) (82.92.89.47) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Wed, 10 Oct 2007 09:07:13 +0000 Received: from brahms.sibelius.xs4all.nl (kettenis@localhost.sibelius.xs4all.nl [127.0.0.1]) by brahms.sibelius.xs4all.nl (8.14.1/8.14.0) with ESMTP id l9A93qcZ027755; Wed, 10 Oct 2007 11:03:52 +0200 (CEST) Received: (from kettenis@localhost) by brahms.sibelius.xs4all.nl (8.14.1/8.14.1/Submit) id l9A93o9D018246; Wed, 10 Oct 2007 11:03:50 +0200 (CEST) Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2007 11:54:00 -0000 Message-Id: <200710100903.l9A93o9D018246@brahms.sibelius.xs4all.nl> From: Mark Kettenis To: drow@false.org CC: uweigand@de.ibm.com, deuling@de.ibm.com, gdb-patches@sourceware.org, eliz@gnu.org, brobecker@adacore.com, jimb@codesourcery.com, rearnsha@arm.com, mark.kettenis@xs4all.nl In-reply-to: <20071009200321.GA4564@caradoc.them.org> (message from Daniel Jacobowitz on Tue, 9 Oct 2007 16:03:21 -0400) Subject: Re: [rfc] [00/16] Get rid of current gdbarch References: <20071008141039.GA12235@caradoc.them.org> <200710091959.l99Jxdqp015297@d12av02.megacenter.de.ibm.com> <20071009200321.GA4564@caradoc.them.org> Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2007-10/txt/msg00228.txt.bz2 > Date: Tue, 9 Oct 2007 16:03:21 -0400 > From: Daniel Jacobowitz > > On Tue, Oct 09, 2007 at 09:59:39PM +0200, Ulrich Weigand wrote: > > I agree that everything would be much easier if the register numbers > > were constants. But note that rs6000 is not the only platform where > > this is not the case, I see the same (or even worse) also in mips, > > m32c, xtensa, ... (The mep usage also seems suspicious.) > > Yes. For some platforms (xtensa, mep) there may not be much we can > do... and MIPS presents its own unique problems because of the use > of pseudo registers for everything. Hmm, this makes me wonder how > deep the broken goes. Maybe we shouldn't translate from DWARF numbers > to internal ones until later. The solution here is (and always has been) making GDB's register number encoding a truly internal encoding. Then we could easily unify the different rs6000/powerpc variants. I understand that people want to keep the ability to talk to old stubs, so the remote target support code in GDB should take care of doing the conversion. Mark