Re: [rfa/mips] Second go at vr5500 hilo hazard fix

[Andrew Cagney <cagney@gnu.org>]

> cgd@broadcom.com writes:
> 
>>> Now that the mips sim 'multi' bits are in place (including good
>>> default), and we have MIPS_MACH(SD) (thanks! 8-), it should be
>>> possible to code a simple macro which checks for the appropriate bfd
>>> machine, and decides whether interlocks are present.
> 
> 
> Well, I had a similar check in:
> 
>     http://sources.redhat.com/ml/gdb-patches/2002-11/msg00642.html
> 
> OK, so it wasn't wrapped up in a nice macro, it just checked the
> architecture directly:
> 
> +   /* There are no timing requirements in vr5500 code.  */
> +   if (MIPS_MACH (SD) == bfd_mach_mips5500)
> +     return 1;
> 
> But that was exactly what Andrew objected to:
> 
>     http://sources.redhat.com/ml/gdb-patches/2002-11/msg00668.html

FYI, I think the comment still stands - I'm describing how IGEN is ment 
to be used (and is what Richard's patch does).

(Richard thanks for pokeing at this),
Andrew

> Then there was:
> 
>     http://sources.redhat.com/ml/gdb-patches/2002-12/msg00080.html
> 
> To quote:
> 
>     As for having to tag each individual entry in the .igen file with an
>     explicit CPU. Yes, that sux. However, I also believe that it has
>     significantly reduced the overall error rate (no more breaking one
>     target by editing another) and that benefit vastly outweighs the short
>     term pain.
> 
> Richard
>