From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 20037 invoked by alias); 5 Mar 2009 19:27:22 -0000 Received: (qmail 20029 invoked by uid 22791); 5 Mar 2009 19:27:22 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-3.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from main.gmane.org (HELO ciao.gmane.org) (80.91.229.2) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Thu, 05 Mar 2009 19:27:11 +0000 Received: from list by ciao.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1LfJDm-0001y1-7B for gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com; Thu, 05 Mar 2009 19:27:06 +0000 Received: from enigma.qnx.com ([209.226.137.106]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Thu, 05 Mar 2009 19:27:06 +0000 Received: from aristovski by enigma.qnx.com with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Thu, 05 Mar 2009 19:27:06 +0000 To: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com From: Aleksandar Ristovski Subject: Re: [patch] mips-tdep: info registers Date: Thu, 05 Mar 2009 19:27:00 -0000 Message-ID: References: <20090223025230.GA11699@caradoc.them.org> <200902230718.n1N7IoBD028396@brahms.sibelius.xs4all.nl> <20090223161756.GA19411@caradoc.them.org> <20090223162602.GH26056@adacore.com> <20090227195607.GJ26056@adacore.com> <20090305191245.GB3744@adacore.com> <20090305192211.GA2342@caradoc.them.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.19 (Windows/20081209) In-Reply-To: <20090305192211.GA2342@caradoc.them.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 Mail-Followup-To: gdb-patches@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2009-03/txt/msg00062.txt.bz2 Daniel Jacobowitz wrote: > On Thu, Mar 05, 2009 at 11:12:45AM -0800, Joel Brobecker wrote: >> Hi Daniel, >> >> IIRC, you've worked on the mips target a few times in the past. >> Do you forsee any problem if mips_register_name return "0" .. "31" >> for the raw GP registers? >> >> What Aleksandar is trying to do is allow "info register 1" to work >> on mips, instead of having to use "info register at"... >> >> Thanks! > > I think it's weird for them to map to the raw registers. info > registers displays the ABI-sized registers, so why should these be any > different? > Bottom line is that mips assembly will have something like this: move $4, $9 # copy contents of $9 into $4 and it would be natural to be able to print value of $9. My patch may have not implemented this correctly, maybe I still need to return pseudo registers, but the numeric name should be recognized in any case.