From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 29770 invoked by alias); 1 Jul 2009 16:14:57 -0000 Received: (qmail 29761 invoked by uid 22791); 1 Jul 2009 16:14:56 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.5 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from sibelius.xs4all.nl (HELO sibelius.xs4all.nl) (82.92.89.47) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Wed, 01 Jul 2009 16:14:48 +0000 Received: from brahms.sibelius.xs4all.nl (kettenis@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by brahms.sibelius.xs4all.nl (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id n61GC9Uc025869; Wed, 1 Jul 2009 18:12:09 +0200 (CEST) Received: (from kettenis@localhost) by brahms.sibelius.xs4all.nl (8.14.3/8.14.3/Submit) id n61GC8tR012795; Wed, 1 Jul 2009 18:12:09 +0200 (CEST) Date: Wed, 01 Jul 2009 16:14:00 -0000 Message-Id: <200907011612.n61GC8tR012795@brahms.sibelius.xs4all.nl> From: Mark Kettenis To: paawan1982@yahoo.com CC: pedro@codesourcery.com, msnyder@vmware.com, teawater@gmail.com, gdb-patches@sourceware.org In-reply-to: <520037.71312.qm@web112516.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> (message from paawan oza on Wed, 1 Jul 2009 09:02:17 -0700 (PDT)) Subject: Re: i386.record.floating.point.patch : with more testing and assurity References: <520037.71312.qm@web112516.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> 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: 2009-07/txt/msg00017.txt.bz2 > Date: Wed, 1 Jul 2009 09:02:17 -0700 (PDT) > From: paawan oza > > Can somebody please help with this open point ? Sorry, I don't understand what point. > --- On Wed, 7/1/09, paawan oza wrote: > > > From: paawan oza > > Subject: Re: i386.record.floating.point.patch : with more testing and assurity > > To: "Pedro Alves" , "Mark Kettenis" , "Michael Snyder" , "Hui Zhu" > > Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org > > Date: Wednesday, July 1, 2009, 9:30 PM > > Hi Hui, > > > > As I clarified earlier, > > these registers are already supported and extended by gdb > > much before this patch. > > all floating point registers are already supported by gdb > > (info floats/info all-registers command gives it) > > > > My aim is : only to make sure that whenever any floating > > point insn gets executed, we record the registers > > (no matter whether it is %st(n) or FCTRL or FTAG or > > FSTATUS) > > there are insns > > e.g. 'ffree' changes FTAG register, so we must record it. > > > > Do you mean to say that we should remove it from just > > enumaration ? > > but anyway we need to record those registers. > > > > Regards, > > Oza. > > > > --- On Wed, 7/1/09, Hui Zhu > > wrote: > > > > > From: Hui Zhu > > > Subject: Re: i386.record.floating.point.patch : with > > more testing and assurity > > > To: "paawan oza" , > > "Pedro Alves" , > > "Mark Kettenis" , > > "Michael Snyder" > > > Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org > > > Date: Wednesday, July 1, 2009, 11:23 AM > > > About this patch, I say my idea > > > again, I told in > > > http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2009-06/msg00014.html > > > @@ -145,7 +145,22 @@ > > >    I386_ES_REGNUM,    > > >     /* %es */ > > >    I386_FS_REGNUM,    > > >     /* %fs */ > > >    I386_GS_REGNUM,    > > >     /* %gs */ > > > -  I386_ST0_REGNUM    > > >     /* %st(0) */ > > > +  I386_ST0_REGNUM,    > > >     /* %st(0) */ > > > +  I386_ST1_REGNUM,    > > >     /* %st(1) */ > > > +  I386_ST2_REGNUM,    > > >     /* %st(2) */ > > > +  I386_ST3_REGNUM,    > > >     /* %st(3) */ > > > +  I386_ST4_REGNUM,    > > >     /* %st(4) */ > > > +  I386_ST5_REGNUM,    > > >     /* %st(5) */ > > > +  I386_ST6_REGNUM,    > > >     /* %st(6) */ > > > +  I386_ST7_REGNUM,    > > >     /* %st(7) */ > > > +  I386_FCTRL,        > > >     /* floating point env regs : FCTRL-FOP > > > */    > > > +  I386_FSTAT, > > > +  I386_FTAG,        > > >     > > > +  I386_FISEG, > > > +  I386_FIOFF, > > > +  I386_FOSEG, > > > +  I386_FOOFF, > > > +  I386_FOP > > >  }; > > > > > > You are working on make prec x86 support fp insn, not > > to > > > extend the fp > > > function of i386 (If you want, you can make a special > > patch > > > for it). > > > > > > Hui > > > > > > On Tue, Jun 30, 2009 at 23:05, paawan oza > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > Hi, > > > > As I am submitting the patch for the first time, > > I am > > > not much aware of gdb test suite. > > > > would you please guide me about how I can put > > the > > > things in the testsuite ? > > > > is it the testsuite which comes along with the > > gdb > > > source ? > > > > gdb\testsuite\gdb.base ?? > > > > Regards, > > > > Oza. > > > > > > > > --- On Tue, 6/30/09, Pedro Alves > > > wrote: > > > > > > > >> From: Pedro Alves > > > >> Subject: Re: i386.record.floating.point.patch > > : > > > with more testing and assurity > > > >> To: gdb-patches@sourceware.org > > > >> Cc: "paawan oza" , > > > teawater@gmail.com > > > >> Date: Tuesday, June 30, 2009, 7:09 PM > > > >> On Tuesday 30 June 2009 14:23:30, > > > >> paawan oza wrote: > > > >> > > > > >> > > As suggested by Hui, > > > >> > > I have come up with more detailed > > and > > > granular > > > >> test case > > > >> > > for the patch which I had submitted > > last > > > week. > > > >> > > > >> Could you please consider migrating that test > > into > > > the > > > >> testsuite? > > > >> You've gone through the trouble of writing > > tests > > > to make > > > >> sure > > > >> the features work now --- putting it in the > > > testsuite means > > > >> we > > > >> have an automatic-ish means to check that it > > > doesn't get > > > >> inadvertently broken in the future.  The way > > it > > > is, > > > >> when your > > > >> code gets in, the test will probably end up > > lost > > > in the > > > >> archives. > > > >> We wouldn't want that, would we?  :-)  > > Having > > > >> auto-tests, also helps > > > >> the person doing the review in confirming > > things > > > work as > > > >> expected (without much effort). > > > >> > > > >> -- > > > >> Pedro Alves > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >