From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 11985 invoked by alias); 23 Feb 2009 04:07:42 -0000 Received: (qmail 11977 invoked by uid 22791); 23 Feb 2009 04:07:41 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.7 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SPF_SOFTFAIL X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mtaout6.012.net.il (HELO mtaout6.012.net.il) (84.95.2.16) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Mon, 23 Feb 2009 04:07:35 +0000 Received: from conversion-daemon.i-mtaout6.012.net.il by i-mtaout6.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) id <0KFI0020037JPP00@i-mtaout6.012.net.il> for gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com; Mon, 23 Feb 2009 06:08:06 +0200 (IST) Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 ([84.228.82.14]) by i-mtaout6.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) with ESMTPA id <0KFI00KY73HGTLF1@i-mtaout6.012.net.il>; Mon, 23 Feb 2009 06:08:05 +0200 (IST) Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2009 08:53:00 -0000 From: Eli Zaretskii Subject: Re: [patch] mips-tdep: info registers In-reply-to: <20090223030014.GE26056@adacore.com> To: Joel Brobecker Cc: aristovski@qnx.com, gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Reply-to: Eli Zaretskii Message-id: References: <20090223020820.GC26056@adacore.com> <20090223025230.GA11699@caradoc.them.org> <20090223030014.GE26056@adacore.com> 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: 2009-02/txt/msg00436.txt.bz2 > Date: Sun, 22 Feb 2009 19:00:14 -0800 > From: Joel Brobecker > > > > Surprisingly, this feature is not documented yet. The documentation > > > mentions "info registers regname", but not "info registers regno". > > > Would you mind adding a line or two and sending a (separate) patch > > > to this list? Eli is the documentation guru... > > > > Should this feature even exist? This is a different "$1" than > > anywhere else in GDB you might type that... > > I was asking myself this question, but there is explict code in > GDB to handle that case, so I thought that this was deliberate. > On the other hand, I also thought that this was a very cool way > of knowing what register number NUM actually is. For instance, > on x86, register number 3 is (drums...) ebx: > > (gdb) info reg $3 > ebx 0xb7e84ff4 -1209511948 > > With x86, the number of registers is fairly limited, but there > are other processors where this isn't the case. The CPU that gave > me the largest number of pimples so far is ia64... > > So I found that the above syntax was a cool thing to know about > and worth retaining. I agree. Documenting it would be good, thanks.