From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 23855 invoked by alias); 31 May 2002 15:20:25 -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 23832 invoked from network); 31 May 2002 15:20:24 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO cygnus.com) (205.180.83.203) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 31 May 2002 15:20:24 -0000 Received: from localhost.redhat.com (remus.sfbay.redhat.com [172.16.27.252]) by runyon.cygnus.com (8.8.7-cygnus/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA21140 for ; Fri, 31 May 2002 08:20:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: by localhost.redhat.com (Postfix, from userid 469) id A886C10A9A; Fri, 31 May 2002 11:19:47 -0400 (EDT) From: Elena Zannoni MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <15607.38035.350353.557111@localhost.redhat.com> Date: Fri, 31 May 2002 08:20:00 -0000 To: Stephen Holford Cc: gdb@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: PowerPC UISA registers and altivec In-Reply-To: <001b01c208b2$40a12a20$d158010a@burlington.wescam.com> References: <001b01c208b2$40a12a20$d158010a@burlington.wescam.com> X-SW-Source: 2002-05/txt/msg00339.txt.bz2 Stephen Holford writes: > Hi > > In GDB release 5.2 the powerpc altivec registers have appeared as part of > the register set used by the default architecture powerpc:common. These > registers now appear in "info reg" commands, or in the register list from > the insight GUI. Does it make sense to require the altivec registers to be > part of powerpc:common? Most powerpc's don't have these registers (my > viewpoint is from the embedded 8xx, 82xx world). > > Steve > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > Stephen F. Holford, P.Eng. > Wescam > (905) 633-4000 x2119 I agree with you that this is a quite unfortunate situation. It would be nice if the bfd contained some indication of the particular architecture in use, so that gdb could automatically switch to 7400 and only then display these registers. For your case, could you do a 'set architecture powerpc:8xx' in gdb? That will give you the exact register set for your platform. See the (long) thread at: http://sources.redhat.com/ml/gdb-patches/2001-11/msg00548.html Elena