From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 22939 invoked by alias); 8 Nov 2002 12:48:26 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 22931 invoked from network); 8 Nov 2002 12:48:23 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO walton.kettenis.dyndns.org) (62.163.169.250) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 8 Nov 2002 12:48:23 -0000 Received: from elgar.kettenis.dyndns.org (elgar.kettenis.dyndns.org [192.168.0.2]) by walton.kettenis.dyndns.org (8.12.6/8.12.5) with ESMTP id gA8CmETj000400; Fri, 8 Nov 2002 13:48:14 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from kettenis@elgar.kettenis.dyndns.org) Received: from elgar.kettenis.dyndns.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by elgar.kettenis.dyndns.org (8.12.6/8.12.6) with ESMTP id gA8CmDPR000672; Fri, 8 Nov 2002 13:48:13 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from kettenis@elgar.kettenis.dyndns.org) Received: (from kettenis@localhost) by elgar.kettenis.dyndns.org (8.12.6/8.12.6/Submit) id gA8CmDIx000669; Fri, 8 Nov 2002 13:48:13 +0100 (CET) To: Andrew Cagney Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [rfa/i386] FP_REGNUM_P() -> i386_fp_regnum_p() et.al. References: <3DC972D0.2010803@redhat.com> From: Mark Kettenis Date: Fri, 08 Nov 2002 04:48:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: Andrew Cagney's message of "Wed, 06 Nov 2002 14:51:44 -0500" Message-ID: <863cqc6xdf.fsf@elgar.kettenis.dyndns.org> X-SW-Source: 2002-11/txt/msg00219.txt.bz2 Andrew Cagney writes: > The attached: > > - converts all the macro's into functions > > - makes the function checks more robust - return true when both the > regnum matches and the ISA has the register > > - adds a method to test for the orig_eax register (the > I386_LINUX_ORIG_EAX_REGNUM is moved from i386-linux-tdep.h to i386-tdep.h). > > Ok to commit? Looks good, but why the move of the Linux orig_eax register test to i386-tdep.{c|h}? I'd really keep this Linux-specific quirk isolated in a Linux-specific file. Ok with that change. Otherwise we might need to discuss this a bit more ;-). Mark