On Friday, October 18, 2002, at 07:34 PM, Elena Zannoni wrote:
>
> The above portion of the patch seems reasonable to me.
>
> I have a few concerns about the testsuite changes. I don't see you
> checking in the output for the new "(raw: 0x123456789....)"
> string. See below for more...
>
>> Index: altivec-regs.exp
>> ===================================================================
>> RCS file: /cvs/src/src/gdb/testsuite/gdb.arch/altivec-regs.exp,v
>> retrieving revision 1.1
>> diff -u -r1.1 altivec-regs.exp
>> --- altivec-regs.exp    14 May 2002 22:02:52 -0000      1.1
>> +++ altivec-regs.exp    4 Oct 2002 20:35:17 -0000
>> @@ -88,13 +88,19 @@
>> # b) the register read (below) also works.
>>
>> if {$endianness == "big"} {
>> -set vector_register ".uint128 = 0x00000001000000010000000100000001, 
>> v4_float
>> = .0x0, 0x0, 0x0, 0x0., v4_int32 = .0x1, 0x1, 0x1, 0x1., v8_int16 = 
>> .0x0, 0x1,
>> 0x0, 0x1, 0x0, 0x1, 0x0, 0x1., v16_int8 = .0x0, 0x0, 0x0, 0x1, 0x0, 
>> 0x0, 0x0,
>> 0x1, 0x0, 0x0, 0x0, 0x1, 0x0, 0x0, 0x0, 0x1.."
>> +set hex_vector ".uint128 = 0x00000001000000010000000100000001, 
>> v4_float =
>> .0x0, 0x0, 0x0, 0x0., v4_int32 = .0x1, 0x1, 0x1, 0x1., v8_int16 = 
>> .0x0, 0x1,
>> 0x0, 0x1, 0x0, 0x1, 0x0, 0x1., v16_int8 = .0x0, 0x0, 0x0, 0x1, 0x0, 
>> 0x0, 0x0,
>> 0x1, 0x0, 0x0, 0x0, 0x1, 0x0, 0x0, 0x0, 0x1.."
>> } else {
>> -set vector_register ".uint128 = 0x00000001000000010000000100000001, 
>> v4_float
>> = .0x0, 0x0, 0x0, 0x0., v4_int32 = .0x1, 0x1, 0x1, 0x1., v8_int16 = 
>> .0x1, 0x0,
>> 0x1, 0x0, 0x1, 0x0, 0x1, 0x0., v16_int8 = .0x1, 0x0, 0x0, 0x0, 0x1, 
>> 0x0, 0x0,
>> 0x0, 0x1, 0x0, 0x0, 0x0, 0x1, 0x0, 0x0, 0x0.."
>> +set hex_vector ".uint128 = 0x00000001000000010000000100000001, 
>> v4_float =
>> .0x0, 0x0, 0x0, 0x0., v4_int32 = .0x1, 0x1, 0x1, 0x1., v8_int16 = 
>> .0x1, 0x0,
>> 0x1, 0x0, 0x1, 0x0, 0x1, 0x0., v16_int8 = .0x1, 0x0, 0x0, 0x0, 0x1, 
>> 0x0, 0x0,
>> 0x0, 0x1, 0x0, 0x0, 0x0, 0x1, 0x0, 0x0, 0x0.."
>> +}
>> +
>> +if {$endianness == "big"} {
>> +     set decimal_vector ".uint128 = 
>> 0x00000001000000010000000100000001,
>> v4_float = .1.*e-45, 1.*e-45, 1.*e-45, 1.*e-45., v4_int32 = .1, 1, 1, 
>> 1.,
>> v8_int16 = .0, 1, 0, 1, 0, 1, 0, 1., v16_int8 =
>> ..0.0.0.001.0.0.0.001.0.0.0.001.0.0.0.001.."
>> +} else {
>> +     set decimal_vector ".uint128 = 
>> 0x00000001000000010000000100000001,
>> v4_float = .1.*e-45, 1.*e-45, 1.*e-45, 1.*e-45., v4_int32 = .1, 1, 1, 
>> 1.,
>> v8_int16 = .1, 0, 1, 0, 1, 0, 1, 0., v16_int8 =
>> ..001.0.0.0.001.0.0.0.001.0.0.0.001.0.0.."
>> }
>>
>
> I would prefer if the above decimal_vector variable settings are left
> near to where they are used in the testfile. I think it makes the
> testfile easier to read if related things are close together.
>
>
>> for {set i 0} {$i < 32} {incr i 1} {
>> -        gdb_test "info reg vr$i" "vr$i.*$vector_register" "info reg 
>> vr$i"
>> +        gdb_test "info reg vr$i" "vr$i.*$decimal_vector" "info reg 
>> vr$i"
>> }
>>
>> gdb_test "info reg vrsave" "vrsave.*0x1" "info reg vrsave"
>> @@ -106,14 +112,9 @@
>> # null char in a string and doesn't print it. This is not a failure, 
>> but
>> # the way gdb works.
>>
>> -if {$endianness == "big"} {
>> -     set decimal_vector ".uint128 = 
>> 0x00000001000000010000000100000001,
>> v4_float = .1.*e-45, 1.*e-45, 1.*e-45, 1.*e-45., v4_int32 = .1, 1, 1, 
>> 1.,
>> v8_int16 = .0, 1, 0, 1, 0, 1, 0, 1., v16_int8 =
>> ..0.0.0.001.0.0.0.001.0.0.0.001.0.0.0.001.."
>> -} else {
>> -     set decimal_vector ".uint128 = 
>> 0x00000001000000010000000100000001,
>> v4_float = .1.*e-45, 1.*e-45, 1.*e-45, 1.*e-45., v4_int32 = .1, 1, 1, 
>> 1.,
>> v8_int16 = .1, 0, 1, 0, 1, 0, 1, 0., v16_int8 =
>> ..001.0.0.0.001.0.0.0.001.0.0.0.001.0.0.."
>> -}
>> -
>> for {set i 0} {$i < 32} {incr i 1} {
>> gdb_test "print \$vr$i" ".* = $decimal_vector" "print vr$i"
>> +        gdb_test "print /x \$vr$i" ".* = $hex_decimal_vector" "print 
>> vr$i"
>                                              ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> 					How could this work?
>> }
>>
>> gdb_test "print \$vrsave" ".* = 1" "print vrsave"
>
>
> I actually removed the "info powerpc altivec" command from the
> testfile, so we should also change "info powerpc altivec" into "info
> vector". Would you mind doing that? I think the output needs no
> changes, beyond whatever is needed to conform to your new format.
>
> thanks
> Elena
>