From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 27346 invoked by alias); 22 May 2012 09:38:01 -0000 Received: (qmail 27268 invoked by uid 22791); 22 May 2012 09:38:01 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-7.4 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,KHOP_RCVD_UNTRUST,KHOP_THREADED,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_W,SPF_HELO_PASS,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Tue, 22 May 2012 09:37:48 +0000 Received: from int-mx12.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx12.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.25]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id q4M9bi0x002600 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Tue, 22 May 2012 05:37:45 -0400 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (ovpn01.gateway.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.9.1]) by int-mx12.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id q4M9bh99014077; Tue, 22 May 2012 05:37:44 -0400 Message-ID: <4FBB5E67.4010901@redhat.com> Date: Tue, 22 May 2012 09:38:00 -0000 From: Pedro Alves User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:12.0) Gecko/20120430 Thunderbird/12.0.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Maciej W. Rozycki" CC: Michael Eager , "gdb-patches@sourceware.org" Subject: Re: MIPS Linux signals References: <4FB850CA.7090701@eagerm.com> <4FBA879F.2020107@eagerm.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit 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: 2012-05/txt/msg00811.txt.bz2 On 05/21/2012 11:33 PM, Maciej W. Rozycki wrote: > And actually, as far as Linux is concerned, I suppose we can actually > have a common mapping that will cover most of the processor architectures > Linux supports as most if not all of the modern ports have standardised on > a common set of magic numbers, as far as I know. Assuming so ... > So linux-tdep.c would > default to that standard mapping and then any oddball port would override > that choice with their own. ... then very much agreed. -- Pedro Alves