From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 17915 invoked by alias); 3 Jul 2009 21:52:53 -0000 Received: (qmail 17907 invoked by uid 22791); 3 Jul 2009 21:52:52 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.4 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from smtp-outbound-2.vmware.com (HELO smtp-outbound-2.vmware.com) (65.115.85.73) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Fri, 03 Jul 2009 21:52:45 +0000 Received: from mailhost4.vmware.com (mailhost4.vmware.com [10.16.67.124]) by smtp-outbound-2.vmware.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EA8B434019; Fri, 3 Jul 2009 14:52:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [10.20.94.141] (msnyder-server.eng.vmware.com [10.20.94.141]) by mailhost4.vmware.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DC571C9C5C; Fri, 3 Jul 2009 14:52:42 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <4A4E7D05.8080608@vmware.com> Date: Fri, 03 Jul 2009 21:52:00 -0000 From: Michael Snyder User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.12 (X11/20080411) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: paawan oza CC: Mark Kettenis , "pedro@codesourcery.com" , "teawater@gmail.com" , "gdb-patches@sourceware.org" Subject: Re: i386.record.floating.point.patch : with more testing and assurity References: <801902.97924.qm@web112506.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> In-Reply-To: <801902.97924.qm@web112506.mail.gq1.yahoo.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: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2009-07/txt/msg00098.txt.bz2 paawan oza wrote: > Hi, > > In My understanding the point was like below. > in the patch there were following register extended in enumeration in > i386-tdep.h > > I386_FSTAT, > I386_FTAG, > I386_FISEG, > I386_FIOFF, > I386_FOSEG, > I386_FOOFF, > I386_FOP > > > According to Hui in some of his previous mails...his idea was >> FCTRL, FOP and so on are the fp reg of amd64. For now, prec is still >> not support amd64 And amd64's support are in amd64-tedp.... files. >Change i386_regnum is not a good idea. I suggest you divide fp patch to 2 >parts. One is for i386, the other for amd64. For now, just send i386 patch >for review. And send amd64 patch when prec support amd64" > > > while, my idea/understanding is: > FCTRL, FOP registers are not only a part of amd64, but also part of i386 (x87 FPU unit) also. > so according to me these registers are part of i386 also and it needed to be also in i386-tdep.h. > > Regards, > Oza. I'm not sure why you want to add those constants to i386-tdep.h, when the rest of your patch does not seem to use them.