From: Jim Blandy <jimb@codesourcery.com>
To: gdb-patches@sourceware.org
Subject: Re: [RFA][2/5] New port: Cell BE SPU (valops.c fix)
Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2006 19:25:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <m37ixn7077.fsf@codesourcery.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20061122142300.GA1120@nevyn.them.org> (Daniel Jacobowitz's message of "Wed, 22 Nov 2006 09:23:00 -0500")
Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@false.org> writes:
> On Sat, Nov 11, 2006 at 07:38:17PM +0100, Ulrich Weigand wrote:
>> The patch below 'fixes' this for SPU by at least not calling
>> VALUE_TO_REGISTER for bitfield assignments, but falling back
>> to the default code. This happens to work for SPU; other
>> platforms with special conversion needs might need to get a
>> chance for the back-end to get involved even then. I guess
>> when this happens we can think of an extended interface that
>> would pass the bitsize information through to the back-end ...
>
> I've got to admit that I don't like it :-(
Yeah --- it'll mask problems if someone else has a convertible
register with bitfields.
> VALUE_TO_REGISTER has only one caller and eight definitions (plus some
> documentation). It shouldn't be hard to update it. What additional
> information do you need? Would passing the two values instead of one
> regnum and one contents do it?
Or, possibly another gdbarch method, VALUE_TO_REGISTER_BITFIELD, which
can be left unset, provoking an internal error in value_assign?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-11-22 19:25 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 35+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2006-11-11 18:38 Ulrich Weigand
2006-11-22 14:15 ` [PING] " Ulrich Weigand
2006-11-22 14:23 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2006-11-22 19:25 ` Jim Blandy [this message]
2006-11-22 19:28 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2006-11-22 19:55 ` Ulrich Weigand
2006-11-22 20:30 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2006-11-22 20:43 ` Ulrich Weigand
2006-11-22 20:57 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2006-11-22 22:13 ` Ulrich Weigand
2006-11-22 22:48 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2006-11-23 13:57 ` Ulrich Weigand
2006-11-23 16:16 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2006-11-23 17:55 ` Ulrich Weigand
2006-11-23 19:59 ` Mark Kettenis
2006-11-24 2:08 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2006-11-24 15:51 ` Ulrich Weigand
2006-11-28 14:56 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2006-11-27 19:31 ` Jim Blandy
2006-11-27 22:06 ` Ulrich Weigand
2006-11-27 22:31 ` Jim Blandy
2006-11-27 23:23 ` Ulrich Weigand
2006-11-27 23:59 ` Jim Blandy
2006-11-28 0:01 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2006-12-06 16:29 ` Ulrich Weigand
2006-12-06 16:43 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2006-12-06 17:10 ` Ulrich Weigand
2006-12-06 17:12 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2006-12-07 6:34 ` Vladimir Prus
2006-12-06 21:21 ` Jim Blandy
2006-12-06 22:02 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2006-12-06 23:24 ` Jim Blandy
2006-12-06 23:16 ` Ulrich Weigand
2006-12-06 23:39 ` Jim Blandy
2006-12-08 15:50 ` Ulrich Weigand
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=m37ixn7077.fsf@codesourcery.com \
--to=jimb@codesourcery.com \
--cc=gdb-patches@sourceware.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox