From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gdb-patches-return-25297-listarch-gdb-patches=sources.redhat.com@sources.redhat.com>
Received: (qmail 4912 invoked by alias); 16 Jun 2003 18:47:09 -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 4894 invoked from network); 16 Jun 2003 18:47:08 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO localhost.redhat.com) (207.219.125.131)
  by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 16 Jun 2003 18:47:08 -0000
Received: from redhat.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by localhost.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id B648F2B5F; Mon, 16 Jun 2003 14:47:05 -0400 (EDT)
Message-ID: <3EEE10A9.50801@redhat.com>
Date: Mon, 16 Jun 2003 18:47:00 -0000
From: Andrew Cagney <ac131313@redhat.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; NetBSD macppc; en-US; rv:1.0.2) Gecko/20030223
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: cgd@broadcom.com
Cc: Kevin Buettner <kevinb@redhat.com>,
	gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
Subject: Re: [WIP/RFC] MIPS registers overhaul
References: <1030510002453.ZM3880@localhost.localdomain> <3EBD6131.30209@redhat.com> <1030514220025.ZM10373@localhost.localdomain> <3EC461C1.1080104@redhat.com> <mailpost.1053057614.17325@news-sj1-1> <yov5znlma5s9.fsf@broadcom.com> <mailpost.1053123913.16634@news-sj1-1> <yov5wugqa4m8.fsf@broadcom.com> <3ECA8EC6.6030405@redhat.com> <yov5llx1mkab.fsf@broadcom.com> <3ECB9DE2.1020906@redhat.com> <3EEBCD84.6010005@redhat.com> <yov565n5yk1a.fsf@ldt-sj3-010.sj.broadcom.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-SW-Source: 2003-06/txt/msg00541.txt.bz2

> At Sat, 14 Jun 2003 21:36:04 -0400, Andrew Cagney wrote:
> 
>> Chris?
> 
> 
> Sorry, I must have missed that msg...  8-)
> 
> 
> 
>> That isn't quite the detail I was looking for.  Does the code need to 
>> look like:
>> 
>> save::
>> 	save FSR
>> 	if (FSR & FR)
> 
>    *** when FR == 1, it's 32 64-bit registers.  so, invert.
> 
>> 	  save 32x32 FP
> 
>    *** or, save 16 (even) 64-bit FP registers, if MIPS2 or later.
>    *** in fact, on MIPS2 and later, better to do that, since it'll be
>    *** more efficient (fewer instructions).

But see my other post.  Using a double store gives different behavior to 
two single stores.  I guess the kernel can do a double store, only then 
swapping the registers before supplying them to gdb.

Andrew