From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 5793 invoked by alias); 1 Jul 2002 17:10:45 -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 5587 invoked from network); 1 Jul 2002 17:10:43 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO uk.superh.com) (193.128.105.170) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 1 Jul 2002 17:10:43 -0000 Received: from sh-uk-ex01.uk.w2k.superh.com (sh-uk-ex01 [192.168.16.17]) by uk.superh.com (8.11.6+Sun/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g61H4l518381; Mon, 1 Jul 2002 18:04:47 +0100 (BST) Received: from superh.com ([192.168.17.40]) by sh-uk-ex01.uk.w2k.superh.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.4905); Mon, 1 Jul 2002 18:09:48 +0100 Message-ID: <3D208CF1.AB7AC45A@superh.com> Date: Mon, 01 Jul 2002 10:10:00 -0000 From: Joern Rennecke Organization: SuperH UK Ltd. X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Elena Zannoni CC: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: Unreviewed patches References: <3D205F19.1B99290F@superh.com> <15648.31077.572892.886182@localhost.redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-OriginalArrivalTime: 01 Jul 2002 17:09:48.0483 (UTC) FILETIME=[1AF78930:01C22122] X-SW-Source: 2002-07/txt/msg00007.txt.bz2 Elena Zannoni wrote: > > Joern Rennecke writes: > > Wed Jun 12 13:20:51 2002 J"orn Rennecke > > > > include/gdb: > > * sim-sh.h: Add enum constants for sh[1-4], sh3e, sh3?-dsp. > > Yes, sorry for the delay. > > Is there any real reason to not just have one enum, which included the > dsp registers as well? Yes. The values are supposed to stay the same, to retain compatibility. Besides, you would need to re-design parts of the simulator to remove the overlaps. > I mean, if the simulator didn't reuse register > numbers for FP regs and DPS regs, then you could get rid of this ugly > code in interp.c: > > else case 44: > if (target_dsp) > RE = val; > else case 45: case 46: case 47: case 48: case 49: case 50: > [...] > case 26: > val = target_dsp ? A0 : FI (1); > break; > [...] > etc. etc. > > And with that you could get rid of the target_dsp variable. Definitely not. The same 0xfxxx opcodes mean different things to sh3-dsp and sh3e. Using the same register number for fpscr and dsr is natural, since the same opcodes are used to load/store dsr on sh3-dsp and fpscr on sh3e. > I think the changes below depend on the cgen patches being accepted first. They have. -- -------------------------- SuperH 2430 Aztec West / Almondsbury / BRISTOL / BS32 4AQ T:+44 1454 462330