From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gdb-patches-return-82547-listarch-gdb-patches=sources.redhat.com@sourceware.org>
Received: (qmail 16050 invoked by alias); 22 Jul 2011 18:40:52 -0000
Received: (qmail 16039 invoked by uid 22791); 22 Jul 2011 18:40:51 -0000
X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.5 required=5.0	tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,TW_EG
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; Fri, 22 Jul 2011 18:40:36 +0000
Received: (qmail 17168 invoked from network); 22 Jul 2011 18:40:35 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO scottsdale.localnet) (pedro@127.0.0.2)  by mail.codesourcery.com with ESMTPA; 22 Jul 2011 18:40:35 -0000
From: Pedro Alves <pedro@codesourcery.com>
To: gdb-patches@sourceware.org
Subject: Re: RFC: partially available registers
Date: Fri, 22 Jul 2011 19:10:00 -0000
User-Agent: KMail/1.13.6 (Linux/2.6.38-8-generic; KDE/4.6.2; x86_64; ; )
Cc: Tom Tromey <tromey@redhat.com>, Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@false.org>
References: <m3vcv6xegp.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> <201107221425.46930.pedro@codesourcery.com> <m3ei1iz6k5.fsf@fleche.redhat.com>
In-Reply-To: <m3ei1iz6k5.fsf@fleche.redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain;  charset="iso-8859-15"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-Id: <201107221940.32070.pedro@codesourcery.com>
X-IsSubscribed: yes
Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gdb-patches.sourceware.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gdb-patches-subscribe@sourceware.org>
List-Archive: <http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/>
List-Post: <mailto:gdb-patches@sourceware.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org
X-SW-Source: 2011-07/txt/msg00642.txt.bz2

On Friday 22 July 2011 16:19:38, Tom Tromey wrote:
> >>>>> "Pedro" == Pedro Alves <pedro@codesourcery.com> writes:
> 
> Pedro> # of expected passes            39
> Pedro> with an unpatched gdb (x86-64-linux), same as with patched gdb.
> Pedro> Is that expected?
> 
> It definitely fails for me with unpatched gdb.
> 
> Does your machine have AVX?  I believe it will only fail on an
> AVX-capable machine.

Ah, that's it then.  I was curious to know why were the
upper parts of the ymm unavailable.

Are you hitting:

regcache_raw_read ()
{
...
      /* A number of targets can't access the whole set of raw
	 registers (because the debug API provides no means to get at
	 them).  */
      if (regcache->register_status[regnum] == REG_UNKNOWN)
	regcache->register_status[regnum] = REG_UNAVAILABLE;
    }

?

-- 
Pedro Alves