This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: RFC: Add 'double' member to 64-bit vector register type
- From: Mark Kettenis <mark dot kettenis at xs4all dot nl>
- To: jimb at redhat dot com
- Cc: drow at false dot org, gdb-patches at sources dot redhat dot com
- Date: Wed, 6 Apr 2005 09:08:50 +0200 (CEST)
- Subject: Re: RFC: Add 'double' member to 64-bit vector register type
- References: <vt2is3omadg.fsf@zenia.home><20050319153709.GA4659@nevyn.them.org> <vt21xabmj9z.fsf@zenia.home><20050320023307.GA12519@nevyn.them.org><200503201114.j2KBE12K023890@elgar.sibelius.xs4all.nl> <vt28y3xw4c0.fsf@zenia.home>
From: Jim Blandy <jimb@redhat.com>
Date: 05 Apr 2005 11:55:43 -0500
Mark Kettenis <mark.kettenis@xs4all.nl> writes:
> Date: Sat, 19 Mar 2005 21:33:07 -0500
> From: Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@false.org>
>
> On Sat, Mar 19, 2005 at 04:13:12PM -0500, Jim Blandy wrote:
> > Well, that brings up the other thought --- since the set of types
> > useful to include in a vector register really depends on the
> > architecture, wouldn't it be better to just export the convenience
> > functions for constructing these types from gdbtypes.c and then let
> > architectures build ones that actually suit their needs?
>
> My inclination is "yes". Anybody else?
>
> I agree.
Getting back to this...
Here's a patch to move the IA-32 vector types out of gdbtypes.h. The
PowerPC Altivec and SPE types are a little more work, since they
need to be per-architecture, so I'll leave that to a separate patch.
How does this look?
Looks fine to me, except for one nit: can you remove the "excessive"
spacing (one blank line between functions is more than enough,
especially since all the new stuff logically belongs together).
Mark