From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 7126 invoked by alias); 24 Mar 2004 07:59:50 -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 7117 invoked from network); 24 Mar 2004 07:59:49 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (66.187.233.31) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 24 Mar 2004 07:59:49 -0000 Received: from int-mx2.corp.redhat.com (nat-pool-rdu-dmz.redhat.com [172.16.52.200] (may be forged)) by mx1.redhat.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i2O7xmWA027591 for ; Wed, 24 Mar 2004 02:59:49 -0500 Received: from localhost (vpn50-33.rdu.redhat.com [172.16.50.33]) by int-mx2.corp.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id i2O7xkM05547; Wed, 24 Mar 2004 02:59:46 -0500 Received: from rsandifo by localhost with local (Exim 3.35 #1) id 1B63Jk-0000P4-00; Wed, 24 Mar 2004 08:00:52 +0000 To: Andrew Cagney Cc: cgd@broadcom.com, gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [rfa/mips] Second go at vr5500 hilo hazard fix References: <87oequw5xw.fsf@redhat.com> <87znadvpr7.fsf@redhat.com> <405B0F63.8050403@gnu.org> From: Richard Sandiford Date: Wed, 24 Mar 2004 07:59:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: <405B0F63.8050403@gnu.org> (Andrew Cagney's message of "Fri, 19 Mar 2004 10:18:59 -0500") Message-ID: <871xni4qtn.fsf@redhat.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.1006 (Gnus v5.10.6) Emacs/21.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-RedHat-Spam-Score: 0 X-SW-Source: 2004-03/txt/msg00555.txt.bz2 After leaving a bit of breathing room in case cgd or anyone else wanted to object... Andrew Cagney writes: >> cgd@broadcom.com writes: >>>> Now that the mips sim 'multi' bits are in place (including good >>>> default), and we have MIPS_MACH(SD) (thanks! 8-), it should be >>>> possible to code a simple macro which checks for the appropriate bfd >>>> machine, and decides whether interlocks are present. >> Well, I had a similar check in: >> http://sources.redhat.com/ml/gdb-patches/2002-11/msg00642.html >> OK, so it wasn't wrapped up in a nice macro, it just checked the >> architecture directly: >> + /* There are no timing requirements in vr5500 code. */ >> + if (MIPS_MACH (SD) == bfd_mach_mips5500) >> + return 1; >> But that was exactly what Andrew objected to: >> http://sources.redhat.com/ml/gdb-patches/2002-11/msg00668.html > > FYI, I think the comment still stands - I'm describing how IGEN is ment > to be used (and is what Richard's patch does). > > (Richard thanks for pokeing at this), > Andrew Does this mean that the patch is approved? Richard