From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 18807 invoked by alias); 9 Apr 2010 15:08:07 -0000 Received: (qmail 18789 invoked by uid 22791); 9 Apr 2010 15:08:06 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.2 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_SOFTFAIL X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mtaout22.012.net.il (HELO mtaout22.012.net.il) (80.179.55.172) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Fri, 09 Apr 2010 15:08:01 +0000 Received: from conversion-daemon.a-mtaout22.012.net.il by a-mtaout22.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) id <0L0M00I0078QPA00@a-mtaout22.012.net.il> for gdb-patches@sourceware.org; Fri, 09 Apr 2010 18:07:11 +0300 (IDT) Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 ([77.124.92.42]) by a-mtaout22.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) with ESMTPA id <0L0M00DJB7BXDXI0@a-mtaout22.012.net.il>; Fri, 09 Apr 2010 18:07:11 +0300 (IDT) Date: Fri, 09 Apr 2010 15:08:00 -0000 From: Eli Zaretskii Subject: Re: PATCH: Support i386 without SSE In-reply-to: To: "H.J. Lu" Cc: pierre.muller@ics-cnrs.unistra.fr, mark.kettenis@xs4all.nl, gdb-patches@sourceware.org Reply-to: Eli Zaretskii Message-id: <83sk74zmu7.fsf@gnu.org> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 8BIT References: <20100407200547.GA20605@intel.com> <201004081908.o38J8D9H025274@glazunov.sibelius.xs4all.nl> <000c01cad75a$b751a490$25f4edb0$%muller@ics-cnrs.unistra.fr> <838w8x1va8.fsf@gnu.org> <834ojl13ci.fsf@gnu.org> X-IsSubscribed: yes 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: 2010-04/txt/msg00234.txt.bz2 > Date: Fri, 9 Apr 2010 06:15:58 -0700 > From: "H.J. Lu" > Cc: pierre.muller@ics-cnrs.unistra.fr, mark.kettenis@xs4all.nl, > gdb-patches@sourceware.org > > >> I think those are expected as they are reserved internally > >> and not visible to user. > > > > If this is a general feature, it's fine with me, but perhaps we should > > add a note about that to where 'maint print register-groups' is > > described in the manual, saying that it could also show registers > > which are not really supported by the target.  Just so that it doesn't > > cause confusion. > > > > Thanks. > > > > How about this patch? It's fine; thanks.