From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 11723 invoked by alias); 1 Feb 2002 21:50:31 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 11670 invoked from network); 1 Feb 2002 21:50:28 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO localhost.redhat.com) (216.138.202.10) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 1 Feb 2002 21:50:28 -0000 Received: from cygnus.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2BA5E3E02; Fri, 1 Feb 2002 16:50:18 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <3C5B0D99.70601@cygnus.com> Date: Fri, 01 Feb 2002 13:50:00 -0000 From: Andrew Cagney User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; NetBSD macppc; en-US; rv:0.9.7) Gecko/20020103 X-Accept-Language: en-us MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Daniel Jacobowitz Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [RFA] Basic structure to describe register formats References: <20020201152209.A17528@nevyn.them.org> <3C5B0438.6010005@cygnus.com> <20020201162042.A20026@nevyn.them.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2002-02/txt/msg00011.txt.bz2 > On Fri, Feb 01, 2002 at 04:10:16PM -0500, Andrew Cagney wrote: > >> Almost approved, I've been pokeing at random targets that once worked >> and they have now all been broken by multi-arch. >> > >> >@@ -0,0 +1,28 @@ >> >+name:arm >> >+resume:r11,sp,pc >> >+4:r0 >> >+4:r1 >> >+4:r2 > >> >> >> My only quarm is with this. It extends the G packet definition a little >> - lines with a leading letter get ignored just like comments and blanks. >> Correct? > > > Do we even have such a definition? I didn't think we did yet. We have what I posted a while back :-) > If so, then yes, I think that's a good extension. Also I would commit > it with the number in bits rather than bytes. You mean - 32:r1? I think the ``4'' indicates 4*2 hex digits. Digit pairs ordered either big or little endian. Yes it could be bits, however, the value would always need to be divisible by 8. >> Any way I think EXPEDITE to better word for describing what is to be >> done with those registers. SID uses that word to describe this exact >> same list. > > > That's a good word for what's going on here, I quite like it. OK with > that change? Yes. done. Andrew