This is the mail archive of the gdb@sources.redhat.com mailing list for the GDB project.
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |
Other format: | [Raw text] |
> If, as I understand your previous postings to imply, having pseudo > registers stored in the cache is wrong, why does regcache_read() allow > them? > > regcache_read (int rawnum, char *buf) > { > gdb_assert (rawnum >= 0 && rawnum < (NUM_REGS + NUM_PSEUDO_REGS)); Lets just pretend you didn't see that :-) Some existing mechanisms store pseudo-register values in the cache. In addition ``NUM_REGS'' is overloaded - it controls too many aspects of GDB - num regs in G packet, num regs to save across an inferior function call, ... Andrew
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |