From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 17596 invoked by alias); 19 Feb 2008 16:21:25 -0000 Received: (qmail 17588 invoked by uid 22791); 19 Feb 2008 16:21:25 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from NaN.false.org (HELO nan.false.org) (208.75.86.248) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Tue, 19 Feb 2008 16:21:05 +0000 Received: from nan.false.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by nan.false.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0FF359802C; Tue, 19 Feb 2008 16:21:04 +0000 (GMT) Received: from caradoc.them.org (22.svnf5.xdsl.nauticom.net [209.195.183.55]) by nan.false.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id ED74A9802B; Tue, 19 Feb 2008 16:21:03 +0000 (GMT) Received: from drow by caradoc.them.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1JRVDL-00089c-0p; Tue, 19 Feb 2008 11:21:03 -0500 Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2008 16:21:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: Ulrich Weigand Cc: Markus Deuling , GDB Patches Subject: Re: [rfc] Replace x86 register macros Message-ID: <20080219162102.GA31326@caradoc.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: Ulrich Weigand , Markus Deuling , GDB Patches References: <47B9ED1B.7070303@de.ibm.com> <200802191544.m1JFibID007582@d12av02.megacenter.de.ibm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200802191544.m1JFibID007582@d12av02.megacenter.de.ibm.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2007-12-11) X-IsSubscribed: yes 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: 2008-02/txt/msg00313.txt.bz2 On Tue, Feb 19, 2008 at 04:44:37PM +0100, Ulrich Weigand wrote: > I'd suggest to keep the I387_..._REGNUM macros, but add a tdep > parameter to them. All users would need to be changed to pass > in the proper tdep, but that only makes the existing dependency > explicit. Alternatively, use fixed numbers for all of these registers and use nameless int0_t registers for any missing from the current gdbarch Then only the register name and type depend on the tdep, not the register number. -- Daniel Jacobowitz CodeSourcery