Re: Submition of i386.record.floating.point.patch

[paawan oza <paawan1982@yahoo.com>]

Hi,
I have been waiting long for the first patch to go.
I have bee trying hard to give explanations and include review comments if any.
I request, please review the patch and provide your acceptance.
It would be nice to see myself contributing in reversible as much as possible.

the questions asked by Hui, have already been clarified.
please see the below mail.

Regards,
Oza.


> > Hi Hui,
> > 
> > I have already clarified the things.
> > 
> > 1 -> all floating point registers (such as FTAG,
> FCTRL,
> > FSTATUS) are required to record because of insn such
> as
> > (FFREE)
> > 2 -> gdb already has a support of all the FPU
> registers
> > including FTAG, FSTATUS, FCTRL etc...
> > 
> > more importantly, patch works and properly tested with
> with
> > all possible scenerios.
> > I am eagerly waiting for the patch's acceptance by
> gdb
> > community : )
> > 
> > please do the needful, If you have any specific
> sugestion
> > please elaborate and I will definately improve upon
> it.
> > please respond.
> > 
> > Regards,
> > Oza.
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > > --- On Fri, 6/12/09, Hui Zhu <teawater@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > > 
> > > > From: Hui Zhu <teawater@gmail.com>
> > > > Subject: Re: Submition of
> > > i386.record.floating.point.patch
> > > > To: "paawan oza" <paawan1982@yahoo.com>
> > > > Cc: "Mark Kettenis" <mark.kettenis@xs4all.nl>,
> > > gdb-patches@sourceware.org
> > > > Date: Friday, June 12, 2009, 10:49 AM
> > > > Even if you think i386 need this
> > > > register, it should not be the part
> > > > of process record patch.
> > > > You can send a patch to make i386 support
> this
> > > register
> > > > first.
> > > > 
> > > > Hui
> > > > 
> > > > On Thu, Jun 11, 2009 at 22:59, paawan
> oza<paawan1982@yahoo.com>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > yes. I know.
> > > > > I clarified that i386 also need FTAG,
> > FSTATUS,
> > > FCTRL,
> > > > registers...
> > > > > I am also waiting for the
> clarification
> > from
> > > Mark.
> > > > > Regards,
> > > > > Oza.
> > > > >
> > > > > --- On Thu, 6/11/09, Hui Zhu <teawater@gmail.com>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >> From: Hui Zhu <teawater@gmail.com>
> > > > >> Subject: Re: Submition of
> > > > i386.record.floating.point.patch
> > > > >> To: "paawan oza" <paawan1982@yahoo.com>
> > > > >> Cc: "Mark Kettenis" <mark.kettenis@xs4all.nl>,
> > > > gdb-patches@sourceware.org
> > > > >> Date: Thursday, June 11, 2009, 1:15
> PM
> > > > >> I had post my idea about your
> patch
> > > > >> in before.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Thanks,
> > > > >> Hui
> > > > >>
> > > > >> On Thu, Jun 11, 2009 at 15:37,
> paawan
> > > oza<paawan1982@yahoo.com>
> > > > >> wrote:
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> > Hi Hui,
> > > > >> > Have you/any-body reviewed
> > floating
> > > point
> > > > patch ?
> > > > >> > I am waiting for the review
> > comments,
> > > and
> > > > also the
> > > > >> clarification from Mark.
> > > > >> > please reply.
> > > > >> > Regards,
> > > > >> > Oza.
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> > --- On Fri, 6/5/09, Hui Zhu
> <teawater@gmail.com>
> > > > >> wrote:
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> >> From: Hui Zhu <teawater@gmail.com>
> > > > >> >> Subject: Re: Submition of
> > > > >> i386.record.floating.point.patch
> > > > >> >> To: "Mark Kettenis" <mark.kettenis@xs4all.nl>
> > > > >> >> Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org,
> > > > >> paawan1982@yahoo.com
> > > > >> >> Date: Friday, June 5,
> 2009,
> > 8:28 AM
> > > > >> >> That is great.  Thanks
> Mark.
> > > > >> >>
> > > > >> >> Hui
> > > > >> >>
> > > > >> >> On Fri, Jun 5, 2009 at
> 10:56,
> > Mark
> > > > Kettenis<mark.kettenis@xs4all.nl>
> > > > >> >> wrote:
> > > > >> >> >> Date: Fri, 5 Jun
> 2009
> > > 10:50:25
> > > > +0800
> > > > >> >> >> From: Hui Zhu
> <teawater@gmail.com>
> > > > >> >> >>
> > > > >> >> >> Could someone
> help us
> > > about
> > > > this?
> > > > >> >> >
> > > > >> >> > I should be able to,
> but
> > I'm
> > > > currently
> > > > >> travelling.
> > > > >> >>  Should be back next
> week.
> > > > >> >> >
> > > > >> >>
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> >
> > > > >>
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> 
> 
> 
>