From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 14271 invoked by alias); 17 Feb 2010 15:46:05 -0000 Received: (qmail 14263 invoked by uid 22791); 17 Feb 2010 15:46:04 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.5 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mail.codesourcery.com (HELO mail.codesourcery.com) (38.113.113.100) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Wed, 17 Feb 2010 15:46:00 +0000 Received: (qmail 7732 invoked from network); 17 Feb 2010 15:45:56 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO caradoc.them.org) (dan@127.0.0.2) by mail.codesourcery.com with ESMTPA; 17 Feb 2010 15:45:56 -0000 Date: Wed, 17 Feb 2010 15:46:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: "H.J. Lu" Cc: Mark Kettenis , gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: PATCH: Enable x86 XML target descriptions Message-ID: <20100217154553.GL9493@caradoc.them.org> References: <20100210200303.GA19632@lucon.org> <20100217145820.GA20676@lucon.org> <201002171522.o1HFMpBN006203@glazunov.sibelius.xs4all.nl> <6dc9ffc81002170741h3611c369mb3efd2b5bcdb8a34@mail.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <6dc9ffc81002170741h3611c369mb3efd2b5bcdb8a34@mail.gmail.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) 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: 2010-02/txt/msg00426.txt.bz2 On Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 07:41:48AM -0800, H.J. Lu wrote: > > Also, you should split i386_linux_register_name(), > > i386_linix_register_type() i386_linux_init_orig_eax() into seperate > > i386 and amd64 versions, and get rid of all the #ifdef BFD64's in the > > *-tdep.c files.  There has been a clear split between 32-bit and > > 64-bit versions of the *-tdep.c code and this diff blurrs that. > > I am not sure it is easy to do, especially for register description. > I have an impression that tdesc_use_registers should only be called > once per arch. i386 and amd64 belong to the same bfd_arch_i386. So? You can still call set_gdbarch_register_name. > I can try to minimize BFD64. But I am afraid that I can't totally avoid it. > Is that acceptable? No, amd64 support really should be in its own file. > > I can't comment on the gdbserver bits; that is Daniel's territory. > > > > Daniel, can you comment on gdbserver changes? Sorry, I will look at it as soon as I have time. -- Daniel Jacobowitz CodeSourcery