From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 22775 invoked by alias); 25 Jul 2002 05:08:53 -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 22767 invoked from network); 25 Jul 2002 05:08:52 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO zwingli.cygnus.com) (208.245.165.35) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 25 Jul 2002 05:08:52 -0000 Received: by zwingli.cygnus.com (Postfix, from userid 442) id 43AC85EA11; Thu, 25 Jul 2002 00:08:51 -0500 (EST) To: Andrew Cagney Cc: gdb@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: WIP: Register doco References: <3D38AF69.7020902@ges.redhat.com> <3D39954D.1020306@ges.redhat.com> <3D39CAD1.3060106@ges.redhat.com> <3D3AE41B.10201@ges.redhat.com> <3D3DF608.8010403@ges.redhat.com> <3D3EC951.1060302@ges.redhat.com> From: Jim Blandy Date: Wed, 24 Jul 2002 22:08:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: <3D3EC951.1060302@ges.redhat.com> Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-SW-Source: 2002-07/txt/msg00259.txt.bz2 Andrew Cagney writes: > Given we're struggling amonst ourselves with the IA-32 I think that > suggests it is a very poor choice for an example. Especially given > there are better cleaner examples to be had using other familar > architectures. I would assume this is why people like H&P chose DLX > when describing CPU architectures. It's my understanding that folks disagree about exactly what the raw bits should be. But we all agree that the raw registers should represent the actual underlying bits only once, and that MMi / ST(j) should be cooked registers that alias each other in the right way. Is that much, at least, correct?