From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 14909 invoked by alias); 19 Aug 2002 18:54:20 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 14773 invoked from network); 19 Aug 2002 18:54:20 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (66.187.233.31) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 19 Aug 2002 18:54:20 -0000 Received: from int-mx2.corp.redhat.com (nat-pool-rdu.redhat.com [172.16.52.200] (may be forged)) by mx1.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g7JIe8l15096 for ; Mon, 19 Aug 2002 14:40:09 -0400 Received: from potter.sfbay.redhat.com (potter.sfbay.redhat.com [172.16.27.15]) by int-mx2.corp.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g7JIsFu23480; Mon, 19 Aug 2002 14:54:15 -0400 Received: from romulus.sfbay.redhat.com (IDENT:oEHvYmIN6//ofit+JIJnmeNvzhBIurTi@romulus.sfbay.redhat.com [172.16.27.251]) by potter.sfbay.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g7JIsEe08344; Mon, 19 Aug 2002 11:54:14 -0700 Received: (from kev@localhost) by romulus.sfbay.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) id g7JIsCE21256; Mon, 19 Aug 2002 11:54:12 -0700 Date: Mon, 19 Aug 2002 11:54:00 -0000 From: Kevin Buettner Message-Id: <1020819185412.ZM21255@localhost.localdomain> In-Reply-To: Daniel Jacobowitz "Re: Register Groups (again)" (Aug 18, 12:01am) References: <3D5EE0C6.7080902@ges.redhat.com> <20020818040145.GA26488@nevyn.them.org> To: Daniel Jacobowitz , Andrew Cagney Subject: Re: Register Groups (again) Cc: gdb@sources.redhat.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-SW-Source: 2002-08/txt/msg00214.txt.bz2 On Aug 18, 12:01am, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote: > On Sat, Aug 17, 2002 at 07:48:22PM -0400, Andrew Cagney wrote: > > See: http://sources.redhat.com/ml/gdb/2001-02/msg00268.html for the > > origins of this idea. > > > > I'd like to propose a new object ``struct reggroup'' and a number of > > methods: > > Hmm, it seems more intuitive to me to have attributes for each > register. Float, vector, system for the register's class or group, and > then we could have other not necessarily mutually exclusive flags. > Like, available in kernel or user mode. I think the attribute idea might be useful elsewhere, but for the purposes of being easily able to specify a register group for ``info registers'' (and other user interface uses), I think Andrew's proposal was fine. Kevin