From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gdb-patches-return-14261-listarch-gdb-patches=sourceware.cygnus.com@sources.redhat.com>
Received: (qmail 10674 invoked by alias); 13 Apr 2002 00:34:09 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gdb-patches-subscribe@sources.redhat.com>
List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/gdb-patches/>
List-Post: <mailto:gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com>
List-Help: <mailto:gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sources.redhat.com
Received: (qmail 10648 invoked from network); 13 Apr 2002 00:34:07 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO cygnus.com) (205.180.83.203)
  by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 13 Apr 2002 00:34:07 -0000
Received: from redhat.com (reddwarf.sfbay.redhat.com [172.16.24.50])
	by runyon.cygnus.com (8.8.7-cygnus/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA16032;
	Fri, 12 Apr 2002 17:34:06 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <3CB77A2E.F72688E2@redhat.com>
Date: Fri, 12 Apr 2002 17:34:00 -0000
From: Michael Snyder <msnyder@redhat.com>
Organization: Red Hat, Inc.
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Andrew Cagney <ac131313@cygnus.com>
CC: Michael Snyder <msnyder@cygnus.com>, gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com,
        jimb@redhat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] d10v_make_iaddr: make it idempotent.
References: <200204122239.g3CMdVB13335@reddwarf.sfbay.redhat.com> <3CB76D5E.5040506@cygnus.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-SW-Source: 2002-04/txt/msg00482.txt.bz2

Andrew Cagney wrote:
> 
> > 2002-04-12  Michael Snyder  <msnyder@redhat.com>
> >
> > * d10v-tdep.c (d10v_make_iaddr): Make it idempotent,
> >       in case it gets applied to an address that is already
> >       in the instruction space.
> 
> Michael, I don't understand this change.  Why does it need to be
> idempotent - isn't that a bug somewhere else? 

If you say "x/i  0x20001234", you don't want it to apply
the transform to that address.

> And why move the code?

Just because I called dq0v_iaddr_p.  I have a preference
for ordering functions rather than adding prototypes.
I guess that's not the best thing to do...




> 
> Andrew
> 
> > Index: d10v-tdep.c
> > ===================================================================
> > RCS file: /cvs/cvsfiles/devo/gdb/d10v-tdep.c,v
> > retrieving revision 2.88
> > diff -c -3 -p -r2.88 d10v-tdep.c
> > *** d10v-tdep.c       2002/04/09 03:00:45     2.88
> > --- d10v-tdep.c       2002/04/12 22:47:30
> > *************** d10v_register_virtual_type (int reg_nr)
> > *** 356,373 ****
> >       return builtin_type_int16;
> >   }
> >
> > - static CORE_ADDR
> > - d10v_make_daddr (CORE_ADDR x)
> > - {
> > -   return ((x) | DMEM_START);
> > - }
> > -
> > - static CORE_ADDR
> > - d10v_make_iaddr (CORE_ADDR x)
> > - {
> > -   return (((x) << 2) | IMEM_START);
> > - }
> > -
> >   static int
> >   d10v_daddr_p (CORE_ADDR x)
> >   {
> > --- 356,361 ----
> > *************** d10v_iaddr_p (CORE_ADDR x)
> > *** 380,385 ****
> > --- 368,387 ----
> >     return (((x) & 0x3000000) == IMEM_START);
> >   }
> >
> > + static CORE_ADDR
> > + d10v_make_daddr (CORE_ADDR x)
> > + {
> > +   return ((x) | DMEM_START);
> > + }
> > +
> > + static CORE_ADDR
> > + d10v_make_iaddr (CORE_ADDR x)
> > + {
> > +   if (d10v_iaddr_p (x))
> > +     return x;       /* Idempotency -- x is already in the IMEM space. */
> > +   else
> > +     return (((x) << 2) | IMEM_START);
> > + }
> >
> >   static CORE_ADDR
> >   d10v_convert_iaddr_to_raw (CORE_ADDR x)
> >