From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 27883 invoked by alias); 12 Feb 2002 23:26:15 -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 27744 invoked from network); 12 Feb 2002 23:26:14 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mms2.broadcom.com) (63.70.210.59) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 12 Feb 2002 23:26:14 -0000 Received: from 63.70.210.1 by mms2.broadcom.com with ESMTP (Broadcom MMS-2 SMTP Relay (MMS v4.7)); Tue, 12 Feb 2002 15:24:58 -0800 X-Server-Uuid: 2a12fa22-b688-11d4-a6a1-00508bfc9626 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 g1CNQCKf027431; Tue, 12 Feb 2002 15:26:12 -0800 (PST) Received: (from cgd@localhost) by dt-sj3-118.sj.broadcom.com ( 8.9.1/SJ8.9.1) id PAA19227; Tue, 12 Feb 2002 15:26:11 -0800 (PST) To: "Andrew Cagney" cc: fche@redhat.com, gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [PATCH] make MIPS sim mips.igen model names one per line. References: <3C683E9B.4070809@cygnus.com> From: cgd@broadcom.com Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2002 15:26:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: "Andrew Cagney"'s message of "Mon, 11 Feb 2002 16:58:51 -0500" Message-ID: X-Mailer: Gnus v5.7/Emacs 20.4 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-WSS-ID: 10777BC01828915-01-01 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2002-02/txt/msg00342.txt.bz2 At Mon, 11 Feb 2002 16:58:51 -0500, Andrew Cagney wrote: > > In this case, I fail to see how _mixing_ them in mips.igen for a > > single set of ISAs (the standars mipsI ... mipsIV, and soon to be > > mips32, mips64), is the right thing. > > > > One way or the other, I think it should be consistent at least for the > > MIPS ISA 'models'. There's no reason to have inconsistency. > > Yes, the debate over this patch occured long ago. My memory is that it > was agreed that the standard MIPS defined variants should all appear on > a single line but specific ISA implementations got to have their own line If that's the way people want to go, I can do that, but: (1) that is directly in opposition to what you indicated was your preference in December 2000 (see the mail I fwded you 8-), and (2) I think it'll be easier for Eric to do his mips32/mips64 merge, then subsequently for me to merge the mipsV changes we have here, if it's one-per-line. (In addition to being esier to get the file into the one-per-line state to begin with. 8-) I just want agreement one way or another, so i can make it so. 8-) cgd