From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 78856 invoked by alias); 13 Jun 2017 21:24:41 -0000 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 Received: (qmail 78793 invoked by uid 89); 13 Jun 2017 21:24:35 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,SPF_HELO_PASS,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy= X-HELO: mx1.redhat.com Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Tue, 13 Jun 2017 21:24:34 +0000 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx01.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.11]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 15DF880495; Tue, 13 Jun 2017 21:24:30 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mx1.redhat.com 15DF880495 Authentication-Results: ext-mx04.extmail.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: ext-mx04.extmail.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=palves@redhat.com DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 mx1.redhat.com 15DF880495 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (ovpn04.gateway.prod.ext.ams2.redhat.com [10.39.146.4]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1755F7E20E; Tue, 13 Jun 2017 21:24:28 +0000 (UTC) Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix register selection in var-access.exp To: Simon Marchi , Andreas Arnez References: <0dc97ea8ffe3b55b2a114ba1102f23c0@polymtl.ca> Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org From: Pedro Alves Message-ID: <610f1674-ef5d-4218-fdba-fbad5c762971@redhat.com> Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2017 21:24:00 -0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.4.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <0dc97ea8ffe3b55b2a114ba1102f23c0@polymtl.ca> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2017-06/txt/msg00408.txt.bz2 On 06/13/2017 09:33 PM, Simon Marchi wrote: > However could you (or somebody else) explain this to me? The doc of > is_amd64_regs_target says: > > 2465 # Return 1 if target has x86_64 registers - either amd64 or x32. > 2466 # x32 target identifies as x86_64-*-linux*, therefore it cannot be > determined > 2467 # just from the target string. > > If x32 identifies as x86_64-something and that procedure should return > true when testing with x32 and x86_64/amd64, why can't we test the > target string for x86_64-*? Some vendors build --target i686-* toolchains, and then use -m64 to target the 64-bit multilib. Thanks, Pedro Alves