From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 8867 invoked by alias); 22 Aug 2002 20:10:30 -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 8855 invoked from network); 22 Aug 2002 20:10:29 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO localhost.redhat.com) (216.138.202.10) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 22 Aug 2002 20:10:29 -0000 Received: from ges.redhat.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3A9443C48; Thu, 22 Aug 2002 16:10:27 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <3D654533.4090205@ges.redhat.com> Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2002 13:35:00 -0000 From: Andrew Cagney User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; NetBSD macppc; en-US; rv:1.0.0) Gecko/20020810 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Elena Zannoni Cc: Kevin Buettner , gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [RFA] rs6000-tdep.c: more e500 support References: <15717.9340.349019.324586@localhost.redhat.com> <1020822184853.ZM8312@localhost.localdomain> <15717.17245.600253.913162@localhost.redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2002-08/txt/msg00708.txt.bz2 > > Hmm... it looks like BookE is using 6 for its primary opcode (which are > > the most significant 6 bits). I wonder if this could cause conflicts > > with other cores which also extend the base PPC instruction set. > > > > A quick Google search reveals: > > > > http://sources.redhat.com/ml/binutils/2001-10/msg00186.html > > > > So apparently there can be conflicts. It's not clear to me if there > > are conflicts for the instructions that we care about, but I wonder > > if it might not be better to add a conjunct which restricts these tests > > to the BookE architecture. (Maybe it'd be a good idea to squirrel > > away the v->arch and v->mach values from rs6000_gdbarch_init() into > > the gdbarch_tdep struct. I guess you could also check to see if > > tdep->ppc_ev0_regnum is not -1.) > > > > Yes, conflicts also with Altivec instructions. I would prefer to save > the architecture & machine pair, rather than check the registers. Try: const struct bfd_arch_info *gdbarch_bfd_arch_info (gdbarch) Andrew