From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andrew Cagney To: Mark Kettenis Cc: kevinb@cygnus.com, gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [rfc] Add some more floatformat types .... Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2001 12:34:00 -0000 Message-id: <3B7D71CC.3020508@cygnus.com> References: <3B76164B.9060908@cygnus.com> <3B7C1287.9080906@cygnus.com> <3B7C8AFA.1080504@cygnus.com> <200108171308.f7HD8Q325622@delius.kettenis.local> <3B7D4280.8010005@cygnus.com> <1010817163956.ZM4083@ocotillo.lan> <3B7D507D.4010801@cygnus.com> <1010817181153.ZM4294@ocotillo.lan> <200108171919.f7HJJWF00447@delius.kettenis.local> X-SW-Source: 2001-08/msg00216.html > Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2001 11:11:53 -0700 > From: Kevin Buettner > > [snip] > > Anyway, my objection to using ``ia64_ext'' for the 82-bit register > type stems from the fact that this name would probably be more > appropriate for the 80-bit double-extended type. Especially since > this is the convention already used for x86. How 'bout this instead? > > ia64_ext - 80-bit double-extended > ia64_reg - 82-bit fp register > ia64_quad - 128-bit quad-precision > > I was going to propose exactly the same [:-)] . FYI Andrew, the ia64_ext > type is stored in 10 bytes of memory, the ia64_reg type is stored in > 16 bytes of memory and ia64_quad is also stored in 16 bytes of memory. To narrow down my reservation here ``reg'' makes me think of a register, and part of the original was over floatformat describing how a register is stored in memory and not what a register looks like. Another would be ia64_spill. > It seems that ia64_ext would be identical to i387_ext, so we could > simply > > #define floatformat_ia64_ext floatformat_i387_ext > > in floatformat.h. Or just use i387_ext, I don't think it needs re-defining. Andrew