From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 28076 invoked by alias); 21 May 2007 14:01:56 -0000 Received: (qmail 28036 invoked by uid 22791); 21 May 2007 14:01:49 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from pollux.ds.pg.gda.pl (HELO pollux.ds.pg.gda.pl) (153.19.208.7) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Mon, 21 May 2007 14:01:37 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pollux.ds.pg.gda.pl (Postfix) with ESMTP id E384BE1E72; Mon, 21 May 2007 16:01:24 +0200 (CEST) Received: from pollux.ds.pg.gda.pl ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (pollux.ds.pg.gda.pl [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id vmn1sd9nuEKX; Mon, 21 May 2007 16:01:24 +0200 (CEST) Received: from piorun.ds.pg.gda.pl (piorun.ds.pg.gda.pl [153.19.208.8]) by pollux.ds.pg.gda.pl (Postfix) with ESMTP id 56C8EE1CE8; Mon, 21 May 2007 16:01:24 +0200 (CEST) Received: from blysk.ds.pg.gda.pl (macro@blysk.ds.pg.gda.pl [153.19.208.6]) by piorun.ds.pg.gda.pl (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l4LE1YE1016446; Mon, 21 May 2007 16:01:35 +0200 Date: Mon, 21 May 2007 14:01:00 -0000 From: "Maciej W. Rozycki" To: Daniel Jacobowitz cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [rfc] Avoid MIPS port breakage on large registers In-Reply-To: <20070521130529.GA1392@caradoc.them.org> Message-ID: References: <20070521130529.GA1392@caradoc.them.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Virus-Status: Clean 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: 2007-05/txt/msg00343.txt.bz2 On Mon, 21 May 2007, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote: > I am about to post target-described register support for the MIPS > port. One thing I noticed while testing it was that "info registers" > went off into the woods on O32 when I added an extra 64-bit register; > there's an unsigned loop until regsize - abi_regsize, which is > supposed to catch 32-bit registers on N64, but runs almost forever > given a 64-bit integer register on O32. This patch just prints such > registers on their own row. Hmm, out of curiosity: what kind of 64-bit register have you got on o32? Maciej