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]

Re: ARM and virtual/raw registers


> > 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, ...

So how about a comment saying pseudo regs shouldn't be in the cache!

R.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]