From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 14281 invoked by alias); 8 Nov 2002 16:34:43 -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 14271 invoked from network); 8 Nov 2002 16:34:38 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO localhost.redhat.com) (216.138.202.10) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 8 Nov 2002 16:34:38 -0000 Received: from redhat.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9ABDA3FE4; Fri, 8 Nov 2002 11:34:41 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <3DCBE7A1.6030007@redhat.com> Date: Fri, 08 Nov 2002 08:34:00 -0000 From: Andrew Cagney User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; NetBSD macppc; en-US; rv:1.0.0) Gecko/20020824 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Mark Kettenis Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [rfa/i386] FP_REGNUM_P() -> i386_fp_regnum_p() et.al. References: <3DC972D0.2010803@redhat.com> <863cqc6xdf.fsf@elgar.kettenis.dyndns.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2002-11/txt/msg00223.txt.bz2 > Andrew Cagney writes: > > >> The attached: >> >> - converts all the macro's into functions >> >> - makes the function checks more robust - return true when both the >> regnum matches and the ISA has the register >> >> - adds a method to test for the orig_eax register (the >> I386_LINUX_ORIG_EAX_REGNUM is moved from i386-linux-tdep.h to i386-tdep.h). >> >> Ok to commit? > > > Looks good, but why the move of the Linux orig_eax register test to > i386-tdep.{c|h}? I'd really keep this Linux-specific quirk isolated > in a Linux-specific file. I'd two choices: - move ORIG_EAX into i386-tdep.c so that (in the next patch) i386_register_reggroup_p() can use it - make i386_register_reggroup_p() a global so that a i386_linux_register_reggroup_p() can call it I took the first one. I'll re-arange things so that my follow on patch uses the second method instead. > Ok with that change. Otherwise we might need to discuss this a bit more ;-). Andrew