From: Jim Blandy <jimb@codesourcery.com>
To: "Ulrich Weigand" <uweigand@de.ibm.com>
Cc: drow@false.org (Daniel Jacobowitz), gdb-patches@sourceware.org
Subject: Re: [RFA][2/5] New port: Cell BE SPU (valops.c fix)
Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2006 19:31:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <m3wt5gu1no.fsf@codesourcery.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200611231755.kANHt6g2013138@d12av02.megacenter.de.ibm.com> (Ulrich Weigand's message of "Thu, 23 Nov 2006 18:55:06 +0100 (CET)")
"Ulrich Weigand" <uweigand@de.ibm.com> writes:
> We might be able to fix this particular problem by having
> value_from_register somehow set the value_offset to 3 when
> retrieving a value of type "char" from a register. However,
> even though there is a comment saying "The assumption is that
> REGISTER_TO_VALUE populates the entire value including the
> location.", that isn't actually possible with the current
> interface since REGISTER_TO_VALUE doesn't actually *get*
> the value itself.
It seems to me this is the problem to fix. When value_from_register
retrieves a char from an SPU register, and that char is occupying byte
three of the register, then if that value doesn't have its
value_offset set, that seems wrong. You're using CONVERTIBLE_P and
VALUE_TO_REGISTER / REGISTER_TO_VALUE to make up for that loss of
information; why not actually provide it?
I'd prefer that to adding a new field to struct value.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-11-27 19:31 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
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 [this message]
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=m3wt5gu1no.fsf@codesourcery.com \
--to=jimb@codesourcery.com \
--cc=drow@false.org \
--cc=gdb-patches@sourceware.org \
--cc=uweigand@de.ibm.com \
/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