From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gdb-patches-return-139843-listarch-gdb-patches=sources.redhat.com@sourceware.org>
Received: (qmail 123025 invoked by alias); 16 Jun 2017 16:17:04 -0000
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
Received: (qmail 122819 invoked by uid 89); 16 Jun 2017 16:17:03 -0000
Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none
X-Virus-Found: No
X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.2 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_SOFTFAIL autolearn=no version=3.3.2 spammy=
X-HELO: mail.baldwin.cx
Received: from bigwig.baldwin.cx (HELO mail.baldwin.cx) (96.47.65.170) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Fri, 16 Jun 2017 16:17:01 +0000
Received: from John-Baldwins-MacBook-Pro-2.local (d-24-245-127-120.cpe.metrocast.net [24.245.127.120])	by mail.baldwin.cx (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id E1B3B10AF18;	Fri, 16 Jun 2017 12:17:03 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4] Don't throw an error in 'info registers' for unavailable MIPS GP registers.
To: "Maciej W. Rozycki" <macro@imgtec.com>
References: <20170412183727.22483-1-jhb@FreeBSD.org> <1732755.e2u3aPx1km@ralph.baldwin.cx> <alpine.DEB.2.00.1705052107190.2590@tp.orcam.me.uk> <17900147.CpTq3xXkZM@ralph.baldwin.cx> <alpine.DEB.2.00.1706160040390.23046@tp.orcam.me.uk>
Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org, Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>, Luis Machado <lgustavo@codesourcery.com>
From: John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.org>
Message-ID: <51527ecc-0387-e6c9-fdb9-a5b699fcc954@FreeBSD.org>
Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2017 16:17:00 -0000
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.12; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.1.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.00.1706160040390.23046@tp.orcam.me.uk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-IsSubscribed: yes
X-SW-Source: 2017-06/txt/msg00463.txt.bz2

On 6/15/17 7:50 PM, Maciej W. Rozycki wrote:
> On Mon, 12 Jun 2017, John Baldwin wrote:
> 
>>>>> However, as you note, the primary goal is removing the error(), and I can
>>>>> live with any format that is readable.
>>>>
>>>> Any other thoughts on "<absent>" vs "<unavl>" vs always using the 64-bit
>>>> table layout vs <insert other option here>?
>>>
>>>  I've been busy with binutils stuff recently, sorry.  I'll try to have a 
>>> look again next week.
>>
>> Ping?
> 
>  Given the lack of consensus otherwise I think ` <unavl>' is the only way 
> to go.  I hope there is consensus about this variant being better than 
> `<unavail'.

Yes, I think this is better certainly. 
>  Thank you for patience and apologies for the long RTT.

No problem.  I'm on vacation-ish so it might be a while before I test and
post the updated patch.

-- 
John Baldwin