From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 31921 invoked by alias); 25 Mar 2004 18:53:25 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 31914 invoked from network); 25 Mar 2004 18:53:23 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mms3.broadcom.com) (63.70.210.38) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 25 Mar 2004 18:53:23 -0000 Received: from 63.70.210.1 by mms3.broadcom.com with ESMTP (Broadcom SMTP Relay (MMS v5.6.0)); Thu, 25 Mar 2004 10:53:08 -0800 X-Server-Uuid: 8D569F9F-42CF-4602-970D-AACC4BD5D310 Received: from mail-sj1-5.sj.broadcom.com (mail-sj1-5.sj.broadcom.com [10.16.128.236]) by mon-irva-11.broadcom.com (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id KAA11146; Thu, 25 Mar 2004 10:52:26 -0800 (PST) Received: from ldt-sj3-010.sj.broadcom.com (ldt-sj3-010 [10.21.64.10]) by mail-sj1-5.sj.broadcom.com (8.12.9/8.12.9/SSF) with ESMTP id i2PIqwov013661; Thu, 25 Mar 2004 10:52:58 -0800 (PST) Received: (from cgd@localhost) by ldt-sj3-010.sj.broadcom.com ( 8.11.6/8.9.3) id i2PIqwJ09799; Thu, 25 Mar 2004 10:52:58 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ldt-sj3-010.sj.broadcom.com: cgd set sender to cgd@broadcom.com using -f To: rsandifo@redhat.com cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com, ac131313@redhat.com Subject: Re: [rfa/mips] Second go at vr5500 hilo hazard fix References: <87oequw5xw.fsf@redhat.com> <87znadvpr7.fsf@redhat.com> <87u10dnzcg.fsf@redhat.com> From: cgd@broadcom.com Date: Thu, 25 Mar 2004 18:53:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-WSS-ID: 6C7DF51E2IW789012-01-01 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2004-03/txt/msg00627.txt.bz2 At Thu, 25 Mar 2004 07:45:38 +0000 (UTC), "Richard Sandiford" wrote: > So, Andrew, is it OK with you to have a bfd_mach check in mips.igen? > As per previous discussion, we'd have something like: > > if (MIPS_MACH (SD) == bfd_mach_mips5500) > ... That is explicitly *not* what i want. I want it hidden under macros, so that there are no obvious uses of bfd_mach* in mips.igen itself. Given that we already have plenty of calls out to macros, some of which may already have an architecture-related check buried way inside (well, i don't think most do right not, but they could), IMO there's no reason it couldn't be done in this case. cgd