From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gdb-return-8874-listarch-gdb=sourceware.cygnus.com@sources.redhat.com>
Received: (qmail 3975 invoked by alias); 12 May 2002 16:03:48 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gdb-subscribe@sources.redhat.com>
List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/gdb/>
List-Post: <mailto:gdb@sources.redhat.com>
List-Help: <mailto:gdb-help@sources.redhat.com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender: gdb-owner@sources.redhat.com
Received: (qmail 3968 invoked from network); 12 May 2002 16:03:46 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO localhost.redhat.com) (24.112.240.27)
  by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 12 May 2002 16:03:46 -0000
Received: from cygnus.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by localhost.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 2AF993E08; Sun, 12 May 2002 12:03:55 -0400 (EDT)
Message-ID: <3CDE926B.7020508@cygnus.com>
Date: Sun, 12 May 2002 09:03:00 -0000
From: Andrew Cagney <ac131313@cygnus.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; NetBSD macppc; en-US; rv:1.0rc1) Gecko/20020429
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Richard.Earnshaw@arm.com
Cc: gdb@sources.redhat.com
Subject: Re: ARM and virtual/raw registers
References: <200205121439.PAA00494@cam-mail2.cambridge.arm.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-SW-Source: 2002-05/txt/msg00129.txt.bz2

> rearnsha@arm.com said:
> 
>>  See the code below (which is  very much a work-in-progress..., so
>> don't even expect it to compile ;-)
> 
> 
> Of course, there was a major flaw in the WIP code I just posted, that 
> confuses what I was talking about in a significant way.  The code for 
> arm_register_read, should be:

(I guessed this :-)

> static void
> arm_register_read (struct gdbarch *gdbarch, int regno, char *buffer)
> {
>   if (arm_register_info[regno].regcache != ARM_PHYS_NONE)
>     /* Recover the register directly from the cache.  */
>     regcache_read (arm_register_info[regno].regcache, buffer);
>   else
>     arm_pseudo_register_read (gdbarch, regno, buffer);
> }

If I had my way, it would read:

> static void
> arm_register_read (struct gdbarch *gdbarch, struct pseudoreg *pseudo, char *buffer)
> {
>     arm_pseudo_register_read (gdbarch, pseudo, buffer);
> }

however, that is a long way off (and, to be honest, I suspect the amount 
of effort required would not give a reasonable return).  In the mean 
time, I recommend:

> static void
> arm_register_read (struct gdbarch *gdbarch, int regno, char *buffer)
> {
>   gdb_assert (regno >= NUM_REGS && regno < NUM_REGS+NUM_PSEUDO_REGS);
>   arm_pseudo_register_read (gdbarch, regno, buffer);
> }

Per, the other e-mail.  Keeping the separation is very important.  The 
next person to work on the code won't know if they are looking at a 
pseudo or raw register.
Having debugged code that used this approach, this this is very important.

enjoy,
Andrew