Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
>   - Are the fv registers for floating point vectors?  Since you
>     put them in both info float and info vector.  I'm guessing that
>     they are.  Makes sense.

Yes.

>   - Can we reuse default_register_reggroup_p for most of this, and
>     just handle the register numbers that it's likely to get
>     wrong?  e.g. we probably do need to handle FPUL here - but
>     calling the default will handle dr0 just fine.

Yes, I hadn't thought of that, but I suppose it can. I attach an 
implementation of this patch. Actually, FPUL is handled fine, but FPSCR 
is not, and, more to the point, none of the vector registers are.

>   - You've put a bunch of registers in system_reggroup (e.g. pc, pr)
>     that other folks don't; but no one besides the TUI uses that
>     anyway, so it doesn't really matter.  I wouldn't have included
>     those two.  I don't remember what the other ones you listed do,
>     so I've got no idea about them :-)

Well, there is, of course, a debate to be had over many of the 
registers. I have included FPSCR, a system register, in the float 
reggroup because (to the initiated) it helps you read the other float 
registers. I'm not really sure what system_reggroup is supposed to be 
for - I imagine sr (status register) that control various features (FPU, 
exceptions etc.) of the CPU is a definite member of this group. Others 
are less clear - how about spc and spr which are like pc and pr for 
exceptions. Incidentally, insight also uses these groups.

The attached patch has pc and pr moved from system to general. I have 
also moved GBR similarly. I had previously classified this as system 
because it is not generally useful (the compiler does not normally 
generate code that uses it), but on reflection it just isn't a system 
register.

At the end of the day the important thing is that 'info registers', 
'info float' and 'info vector' print the right thing.

OK?

Andrew Stubbs




P.S. Your email headers contain:

   Mail-Followup-To: Andrew STUBBS <andrew.stubbs@st.com>,
	  gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com

which means I end up replying to myself! Is this deliberate? It is 
slightly irritating.