From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 4222 invoked by alias); 13 Sep 2002 02:26:47 -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 4208 invoked from network); 13 Sep 2002 02:26:46 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO neon-gw.transmeta.com) (63.209.4.196) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 13 Sep 2002 02:26:46 -0000 Received: (from root@localhost) by neon-gw.transmeta.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id TAA27874; Thu, 12 Sep 2002 19:26:39 -0700 Received: from mailhost.transmeta.com(10.1.1.15) by neon-gw.transmeta.com via smap (V2.1) id xma027868; Thu, 12 Sep 02 19:26:16 -0700 Received: from casey.transmeta.com (casey.transmeta.com [10.10.25.22]) by deepthought.transmeta.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g8D2QLj29520; Thu, 12 Sep 2002 19:26:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from dje@localhost) by casey.transmeta.com (8.9.3/8.7.3) id TAA07333; Thu, 12 Sep 2002 19:26:21 -0700 From: Doug Evans MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <15745.19661.399094.489915@casey.transmeta.com> Date: Thu, 12 Sep 2002 19:26:00 -0000 To: DJ Delorie Cc: ac131313@ges.redhat.com, binutils@sources.redhat.com, gdb@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: New binutils directory src/include/cpu/ for .cpu and .opc files? In-Reply-To: <200209130143.g8D1hdg03001@greed.delorie.com> References: <3D813B07.4090401@ges.redhat.com> <200209130143.g8D1hdg03001@greed.delorie.com> X-SW-Source: 2002-09/txt/msg00140.txt.bz2 DJ Delorie writes: > > I'd like to propose a new directory: > > > > src/include/cpu/ > > > > The directory would contain the CGEN .cpu and .opc input files used to > > generate CGEN based binutils disassemblers, assemblers and (?) > > relocations. GDB could also use these files when generating CGEN based > > simulators. > > They aren't really include files, they're *source* files. Shouldn't > they go in one of the source directories? > > I really don't think we want to go down the slippery slope of using > include as a catch-all. Perhaps the opcodes directory would be a > better choice? I've always thought the .opc files should go in src/opcodes. Similarily, I kinda think the opcodes file generators should go in opcodes. After all, they're rather closely tied with the rest of opcodes. They're also closely tied with cgen of course. But application file generators should be able to go with the application and not cgen. Otherwise writing new generators for new applications becomes problematic .... And, fwiw, I don't like putting the .cpu files in src/include either.