From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gdb-patches-return-52094-listarch-gdb-patches=sources.redhat.com@sourceware.org>
Received: (qmail 24797 invoked by alias); 9 Nov 2007 02:12:38 -0000
Received: (qmail 24789 invoked by uid 22791); 9 Nov 2007 02:12:37 -0000
X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Received: from hq.tensilica.com (HELO mailapp.tensilica.com) (65.205.227.29)     by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Fri, 09 Nov 2007 02:12:35 +0000
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]) 	by mailapp.tensilica.com with esmtp (Exim 4.34) 	id 1IqJMP-0005wT-PA; Thu, 08 Nov 2007 18:12:41 -0800
Received: from mailapp.tensilica.com ([127.0.0.1]) 	by localhost (mailapp [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) 	with ESMTP id 22642-03; Thu, 8 Nov 2007 18:12:41 -0800 (PST)
Received: from maxim_fc5.hq.tensilica.com ([192.168.11.68]) 	by mailapp.tensilica.com with esmtp (Exim 4.34) 	id 1IqJMN-0005w0-SA; Thu, 08 Nov 2007 18:12:39 -0800
Message-ID: <4733C204.9040005@hq.tensilica.com>
Date: Fri, 09 Nov 2007 02:12:00 -0000
From: Maxim Grigoriev <maxim@tensilica.com>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.9 (X11/20070102)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Ulrich Weigand <uweigand@de.ibm.com>
CC: Markus Deuling <deuling@de.ibm.com>,   GDB Patches <gdb-patches@sourceware.org>
Subject: Re: [rfc] [05/05] Get rid of current_gdbarch in xtensa
References: <200711082155.lA8LtPjO001820@d12av02.megacenter.de.ibm.com>
In-Reply-To: <200711082155.lA8LtPjO001820@d12av02.megacenter.de.ibm.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-IsSubscribed: yes
Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gdb-patches.sourceware.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gdb-patches-subscribe@sourceware.org>
List-Archive: <http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/>
List-Post: <mailto:gdb-patches@sourceware.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org
X-SW-Source: 2007-11/txt/msg00190.txt.bz2

Ulrich Weigand wrote:
> Markus Deuling wrote:
>   
>> -#define AREG_NUMBER(r, wb) \
>> -  ((((r) - (gdbarch_tdep (current_gdbarch)->a0_base + 0) + (((wb) \
>> -  & ((gdbarch_tdep (current_gdbarch)->num_aregs - 1) >> 2)) << WB_SHIFT)) & \
>> -  (gdbarch_tdep (current_gdbarch)->num_aregs - 1)) \
>> -  + gdbarch_tdep (current_gdbarch)->ar_base)
>>     
>> +/* Convert a live Ax register number to the corresponding Areg number.  */
>> +static int
>> +areg_number (struct gdbarch *gdbarch, int regnum, ULONGEST wb)
>> +{
>> +  struct gdbarch_tdep *tdep = gdbarch_tdep (gdbarch);
>> +  int areg;
>> +
>> +  areg = regnum - tdep->a0_base + tdep->ar_base;
>> +  areg += (wb & ((tdep->num_aregs - 1) >> 2)) << WB_SHIFT;
>> +  areg &= tdep->num_aregs - 1;
>> +
>> +  return areg;
>> +}
>>     
>
> The function does not look equivalent to the macro, that should be
>
>   areg = regnum - tdep->a0_base;
>   areg += (wb & ((tdep->num_aregs - 1) >> 2)) << WB_SHIFT;
>   areg &= tdep->num_aregs - 1;
>
>   return areg + tdep->ar_base;
>   
Ulrich is right. The function should look like he suggested :

static int
areg_number (struct gdbarch *gdbarch, int regnum, ULONGEST wb)
{
  struct gdbarch_tdep *tdep = gdbarch_tdep (gdbarch);
  int areg;

  areg = regnum - tdep->a0_base;
  areg += (wb & ((tdep->num_aregs - 1) >> 2)) << WB_SHIFT;
  areg &= tdep->num_aregs - 1;

  return areg + tdep->ar_base;
}

I applied Markus's patch, corrected areg_number(), and ran GDB dejagnu 
tests.
No regression has been detected.

-- Maxim