Re: [patch rfc, 6.0?] only allow raw raw registers; Was: [patch rfc]Add NUM_REGS pseudo regs to MIPS

[Andrew Cagney <ac131313 at redhat dot com>]

> On Mon, Jul 28, 2003 at 12:38:57PM -0400, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
>
> > On Mon, Jul 28, 2003 at 11:37:12AM -0400, Andrew Cagney wrote:
>
> > > I've checked this tweak into 6.0 and mainline:
> > > 
>
> > > >2003-07-27  Andrew Cagney  <cagney@redhat.com>
> > > >
> > > >	* mips-tdep.c (print_gp_register_row): Print the GPR's register
> > > >	MOD NUM_REGS.
> > > >
>
> > > 
> > > and this change into just the mainline (6.0 will follow in a few days if 
> > > no one notices a problem):
> > > 
>
> > > >2003-07-27  Andrew Cagney  <cagney@redhat.com>
> > > >
> > > >	* regcache.c (struct regcache_descr): Update comments on
> > > >	nr_raw_registers.
> > > >	(init_legacy_regcache_descr): Don't set nr_raw_registers or
> > > >	sizeof_raw_register_valid_p.
> > > >	(init_regcache_descr): Set nr_raw_registers and
> > > >	sizeof_raw_register_valid_p before calling
> > > >	init_legacy_regcache_descr.
> > > >
>
> > On a related note, before this change (2003-07-07 actually)
> > mipsel-linux was completely broken.  Info registers, in addition to
> > printing R90, also claimed that all registers were zero.  Backtraces
> > broke for the same reason.
> >
> > I haven't tried newer mainline yet; I will today or tomorrow.
>
>
> Sorry, Andrew - we're almost there but MIPS register handling is still
> messed up.  Take a look at "info all-registers":

What does "maint print [raw-]registers" look like?

> (gdb) i all-registers
>           zero       at       v0       v1       a0       a1       a2       a3
>  R0   00000000 00000000 00000000 00000000 00000000 00000000 00000000 00000000
>             t0       t1       t2       t3       t4       t5       t6       t7
>  R8   00000000 00000000 00000000 00000000 00000000 00000000 00000000 00000000
>             s0       s1       s2       s3       s4       s5       s6       s7
>  R16  7fff7eaf 7fff7dcc 7fff7dd4 00000003 004059cc 10012808 00000000 00000000
>             t8       t9       k0       k1       gp       sp       s8       ra
>  R24  00000000 00000000 00000000 00000000 00000000 7fff7df0 00000000 00000000
>           zero       at       v0       v1       a0       a1
>       00000000 0067194b 00000004 80279720 00000020 2aac0ac0
>  a2:  0xffffffff flt: nan               dbl: nan
>  a3:  0xffffffff flt: nan
>  t0:  0xffffffff flt: nan               dbl: nan
>  t1:  0xffffffff flt: nan
>  t2:  0xffffffff flt: nan               dbl: nan
>  t3:  0xffffffff flt: nan
>
>
> Obviously the registers aren't where it expects them to be.
>
> -- Daniel Jacobowitz MontaVista Software Debian GNU/Linux Developer