This is the mail archive of the binutils@sources.redhat.com mailing list for the binutils project.


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

Re: More i386 architectures?

[Get raw message]

> I'm guessing that the real gdb need is to disassemble for different
> architectures, and we currently only have three classes that need
> distinguishing: i8086, i386 and x86_64.  All the other possibilities are
> just minor variations that the current disassembly code ignores.
> 
> If you want some sort of automatic configuration for a simulator, then I
> question whether that's necessary.

For the disassembler, GDB does what ever opcodes does (well pretty much, 
must clean up that interface to --disassembler-options).  GDB was using 
bfd_mach_i386_i386_intel_syntax but I fixed that :-)

What GDB does do is exploit (er leverage, er ...) BFD's list of CPUs. 
GDB's ``set architecture'' just goes to BFD and uses its list.  I'd like 
a meaningful list even if BFD never does anything useful with it.

Orthogonal to that you can do things like ``set mips fpu {on,off}''.

enjoy,
Andrew



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