Re: pseudo registers in the regcache

[Andrew Cagney <ac131313@cygnus.com>]

> How about renaming the 68k stuff as being MEMORY_REGS and reserving the 
>> > PSEUDO concept for what we really seem to want -- a view of a (or a 
>> > combination of) physical (or memory) register(s)?
> 
>> 
>> Or update mc68hc11 :-)
> 
> 
> Well, I was hoping to avoid something that would be regarded as a majorly 
> invasive change (and which I've no chance of testing).  Reclassifying the 
> mc68hc11 pseudos as memory registers would avoid that (basically it would 
> be a search and replace type operation ;-).

I'd rather not see GDB do anything to legitimatize a now redundant 
mechanism.

I think the line-in-sand approach to just banning values in 
pseudo-registers post register-read is both better and easier

Shouldn't be too hard to do this using the tweaked regcache  - that uses 
regcache->descr->nr_registers instead of NUM_REGS + NUM_PSEUDO_REGS.  In 
fact [evil laughter :-)] I can think of a few other things that it could 
disallow:
	- holes in the register cache
	- differing register virtual and raw sizes
	- ...
(but worry about that later :-)

enjoy,
Andrew