This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: [patch/rfc/rfa:sh] gdbarch_register_read() -> gdbarch_cooked_register_read()
Andrew Cagney writes:
> > > > One NB. The parameter set is technically redundant. The assertion:
> > > >
> > > > gdbarch == regcache_gdbarch (regcache)
> > > >
> > > > always holds so the gdbarch parameter isn't strictly needed. I figured
> > > > that it is more convenient to include the gdbarch as a parameter and
> > > > save everyone the hassle of including the above line in their *-tdep code.
> > > >
> > > > The SH stuff should be reviewed. I think its on the right track since
> > > > sh-tdep.c no longer refers to current_regcache!!!
> > > >
> >
> >
> > So, wait a minute, is the sh the only port that overwrites the generic
> > register reads and writes to handle pseudo registers?
>
> Gnew speak: s/pseudo/cooked/. Pseudo registers are implemented
> differently :-)
>
right, I am still catching up with the new jargon.
Gnew, the 'stralian for GNU? :-)
> In GDB (i.e. the official GDB sources)? Yes.
>
> The only architecture using the gdbarch register read/write (i.e. the
> new cooked interface) is the SH.
>
Oh dear. Watch out <drumroll> I am adding this to the ppc as
well. Will be submitted relatively soon (still WIP). I've got 64 bit
regs that can be viewed/manipulated as 32 bit ones.
> The only platform using the old fetch/store pseudo register interface is
> the m68hc11. The conversion looks easy.
>
> The MIPS is the platform that desperatly needs to start using cooked
> registers. The Arm is waiting, ready to pounce, when all the changes
> are in.
>
Elena
> enjoy,
> Andrew
>