From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 28952 invoked by alias); 6 Apr 2011 20:51:32 -0000 Received: (qmail 28943 invoked by uid 22791); 6 Apr 2011 20:51:32 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,MSGID_FROM_MTA_HEADER,SPF_SOFTFAIL,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mtagate6.uk.ibm.com (HELO mtagate6.uk.ibm.com) (194.196.100.166) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Wed, 06 Apr 2011 20:51:27 +0000 Received: from d06nrmr1707.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (d06nrmr1707.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com [9.149.39.225]) by mtagate6.uk.ibm.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id p36KpQkp002035 for ; Wed, 6 Apr 2011 20:51:26 GMT Received: from d06av02.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (d06av02.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com [9.149.37.228]) by d06nrmr1707.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id p36Kq89w1663208 for ; Wed, 6 Apr 2011 21:52:08 +0100 Received: from d06av02.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (loopback [127.0.0.1]) by d06av02.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (8.14.4/8.13.1/NCO v10.0 AVout) with ESMTP id p36KpPAk003506 for ; Wed, 6 Apr 2011 14:51:25 -0600 Received: from tuxmaker.boeblingen.de.ibm.com (tuxmaker.boeblingen.de.ibm.com [9.152.85.9]) by d06av02.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (8.14.4/8.13.1/NCO v10.0 AVin) with SMTP id p36KpOLp003493; Wed, 6 Apr 2011 14:51:24 -0600 Message-Id: <201104062051.p36KpOLp003493@d06av02.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com> Received: by tuxmaker.boeblingen.de.ibm.com (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Wed, 06 Apr 2011 22:51:24 +0200 Subject: Re: [try 2nd 2/8] Rename copy_* functions to arm_copy_* To: yao@codesourcery.com (Yao Qi) Date: Wed, 06 Apr 2011 20:51:00 -0000 From: "Ulrich Weigand" Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org In-Reply-To: <4D8B4BC5.8090603@codesourcery.com> from "Yao Qi" at Mar 24, 2011 09:48:53 PM MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit 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: 2011-04/txt/msg00096.txt.bz2 Yao Qi wrote: > The copy functions for arm and thumb instructions should be different. > So some copy_* functions are renamed to arm_copy_* functions. In each > copy functions, there are some arm-thumb-independent part, such as > install cleanup helper, store register, etc. This part is moved to > install_* functions. The interface between the copy_ routines and the install_ routines seems a bit odd in some cases: mostly, values are just passed as arguments, but in some cases, they are passed via displaced_step_closure fields. I'd prefer if this were handled in a regular manner: the copy_ routines parse the insn text, extract all required information and pass it all as arguments to the install_ routine. The install_ routine then stores all information that is needed by the cleanup_ routine into the displaced_step_closure struct. Otherwise, the split seems OK to me. Bye, Ulrich -- Dr. Ulrich Weigand GNU Toolchain for Linux on System z and Cell BE Ulrich.Weigand@de.ibm.com