From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 16881 invoked by alias); 8 Jun 2002 07:18:32 -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 16873 invoked from network); 8 Jun 2002 07:18:31 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mms3.broadcom.com) (63.70.210.38) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 8 Jun 2002 07:18:31 -0000 Received: from 63.70.210.1 by mms3.broadcom.com with ESMTP (Broadcom MMS-3 SMTP Relay (MMS v4.7)); Sat, 08 Jun 2002 00:18:28 -0700 X-Server-Uuid: 1e1caf3a-b686-11d4-a6a3-00508bfc9ae5 Received: from dt-sj3-118.sj.broadcom.com (dt-sj3-118 [10.21.64.118]) by mail-sj1-5.sj.broadcom.com (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id g587IU1S021208 for ; Sat, 8 Jun 2002 00:18:30 -0700 ( PDT) Received: (from cgd@localhost) by dt-sj3-118.sj.broadcom.com ( 8.9.1/SJ8.9.1) id AAA03279; Sat, 8 Jun 2002 00:18:28 -0700 (PDT) To: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [applied mips sim patch] better implementations of mul-acc ops. References: <200206080306.UAA26237@dt-sj3-118.sj.broadcom.com> From: cgd@broadcom.com Date: Sat, 08 Jun 2002 00:18:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: cgd@broadcom.com's message of "Sat, 8 Jun 2002 03:07:10 +0000 (UTC)" Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 X-WSS-ID: 111F704E1534383-01-01 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2002-06/txt/msg00121.txt.bz2 At Sat, 8 Jun 2002 03:07:10 +0000 (UTC), cgd@broadcom.com wrote: > [ tested in the same way as described in > http://sources.redhat.com/ml/gdb-patches/2002-06/msg00103.html, but > with a mipsisa64-elf target hacked to use the -mips64 multilib. ] After checking it in (of course!), I looked at the test results some more, and found that, before and after, none of the tests which use the {,n}m{add,sub}.fmt instructions actually passed either before or after. Running with a simulator from a month ago but sources otherwise the same, they seem to work... So, i've got some bug-hunting to do. Not worried about it screwing people up, because mipsisa64-elf isn't even a supported in gcc right now. 8-) chris