This is the mail archive of the gdb-patches@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: [RFA] New bitflags type and eflags on i386/x86-64


On Thu, Aug 29, 2002 at 04:57:42PM +0200, Michal Ludvig wrote:

Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:

>Well, actually, I like it.

Wow! That's a surprise! :-)))


>Some textual changes and comments:

Thanks, I'm not a native speaker ;-)


>>+ builtin_type_i386_eflags = >>+ init_flags_type (32 /* EFLAGS_LENGTH */, >>+ "__i386_eflags", (struct objfile *) NULL);
>>+ add_flag_name (builtin_type_i386_eflags, 0, "CF");
>>+ builtin_type_simd_mxcsr =
>>+ init_flags_type (32 /* EFLAGS_LENGTH */,
>>+ "__simd_mxcsr", (struct objfile *) NULL);
>>+ add_flag_name (builtin_type_simd_mxcsr, 0, "IE");

> Do these really need to be in common code?  That's gross.  Yes, I know
> a whole lot of others are, but those are all floatformats or standard
> vectors.
> This should be in i386-tdep.c.


I don't compile i386-tdep.c for x86-64. Should I duplicate the code for x86-64 or better leave it here to have it only once?

Hmm, there's already some common files between the ports; there should
be another, I think.  I don't want something as i386-specific as this
anywhere near gdbtypes.c.  How about i386-common-tdep.c or something
like that?
It shouldn't be in gdbtypes.c.

MarkK, I believe, is planning on merging much of the i386 and x86-64 stuff so that a single GDB would support both -- that would remove the issue.

Is there any immediate technical problem stopping x86-64 linking in i386-tdep.c? (Yes scary, multi-arch).

Andrew



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