From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 14946 invoked by alias); 26 Nov 2001 17:18:22 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.cygnus.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 14910 invoked from network); 26 Nov 2001 17:18:19 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO localhost.cygnus.com) (24.147.211.196) by sourceware.cygnus.com with SMTP; 26 Nov 2001 17:18:19 -0000 Received: from cygnus.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost.cygnus.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C0A1D3DBB; Mon, 26 Nov 2001 12:18:18 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <3C02795A.9000104@cygnus.com> Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2001 10:39:00 -0000 From: Andrew Cagney User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; NetBSD macppc; en-US; rv:0.9.3) Gecko/20011020 X-Accept-Language: en-us MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Daniel Jacobowitz Cc: Jakub Jelinek , gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix sparc-*-linux register fetching/storing References: <20011123154220.A562@sunsite.ms.mff.cuni.cz> <20011125020147.A32180@nevyn.them.org> <20011125113201.C4087@devserv.devel.redhat.com> <20011125115446.A15038@nevyn.them.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2001-11/txt/msg00229.txt.bz2 > > Well, regcache_collect is the only approved interface to the contents > of registers[] for one thing. It would also prevent the need for the > cast (although you'd have to clear the upper half of the variable > first and make sure to stuff it into the low bytes since we're > big-endian. Ew.). > > Andrew? Do we need to have a regcache_collect_core_addr, to sign > extend and shift appropriately for each architecture? That sounds like overkill. If you need to be doing sign/zero extension stuff then I'd be looking at explicit calls to extract_signed_integer() and/or extract_unsigned_integer() in the nat code. A sequence like: void *buf = alloca (MAX_REGISTER_RAW_SIZE); regcache_collect (my reg, buf); LONGEST val = extract_unsigned_integer (buf, REGISTER_RAW_SIZE(my reg)); store_unsigned_integer (dest, dest size, val); should insulate it from the current problems. Andrew From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andrew Cagney To: Daniel Jacobowitz Cc: Jakub Jelinek , gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix sparc-*-linux register fetching/storing Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2001 09:18:00 -0000 Message-ID: <3C02795A.9000104@cygnus.com> References: <20011123154220.A562@sunsite.ms.mff.cuni.cz> <20011125020147.A32180@nevyn.them.org> <20011125113201.C4087@devserv.devel.redhat.com> <20011125115446.A15038@nevyn.them.org> X-SW-Source: 2001-11/msg00444.html Message-ID: <20011126091800.SaKyIjlppcj3K_CfeWibz7Fz5VERhAhwYVoza1Zjj30@z> > > Well, regcache_collect is the only approved interface to the contents > of registers[] for one thing. It would also prevent the need for the > cast (although you'd have to clear the upper half of the variable > first and make sure to stuff it into the low bytes since we're > big-endian. Ew.). > > Andrew? Do we need to have a regcache_collect_core_addr, to sign > extend and shift appropriately for each architecture? That sounds like overkill. If you need to be doing sign/zero extension stuff then I'd be looking at explicit calls to extract_signed_integer() and/or extract_unsigned_integer() in the nat code. A sequence like: void *buf = alloca (MAX_REGISTER_RAW_SIZE); regcache_collect (my reg, buf); LONGEST val = extract_unsigned_integer (buf, REGISTER_RAW_SIZE(my reg)); store_unsigned_integer (dest, dest size, val); should insulate it from the current problems. Andrew