This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sourceware.org
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: i386.record.floating.point.patch : with more testing and assurity
- From: Hui Zhu <teawater at gmail dot com>
- To: paawan oza <paawan1982 at yahoo dot com>, Pedro Alves <pedro at codesourcery dot com>, Mark Kettenis <mark dot kettenis at xs4all dot nl>, Michael Snyder <msnyder at vmware dot com>
- Cc: gdb-patches at sourceware dot org
- Date: Wed, 1 Jul 2009 13:53:19 +0800
- Subject: Re: i386.record.floating.point.patch : with more testing and assurity
- References: <736794.15455.qm@web112516.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
About this patch, I say my idea again, I told in
http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2009-06/msg00014.html
@@ -145,7 +145,22 @@
I386_ES_REGNUM, /* %es */
I386_FS_REGNUM, /* %fs */
I386_GS_REGNUM, /* %gs */
- I386_ST0_REGNUM /* %st(0) */
+ I386_ST0_REGNUM, /* %st(0) */
+ I386_ST1_REGNUM, /* %st(1) */
+ I386_ST2_REGNUM, /* %st(2) */
+ I386_ST3_REGNUM, /* %st(3) */
+ I386_ST4_REGNUM, /* %st(4) */
+ I386_ST5_REGNUM, /* %st(5) */
+ I386_ST6_REGNUM, /* %st(6) */
+ I386_ST7_REGNUM, /* %st(7) */
+ I386_FCTRL, /* floating point env regs : FCTRL-FOP */
+ I386_FSTAT,
+ I386_FTAG,
+ I386_FISEG,
+ I386_FIOFF,
+ I386_FOSEG,
+ I386_FOOFF,
+ I386_FOP
};
You are working on make prec x86 support fp insn, not to extend the fp
function of i386 (If you want, you can make a special patch for it).
Hui
On Tue, Jun 30, 2009 at 23:05, paawan oza<paawan1982@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> Hi,
> As I am submitting the patch for the first time, I am not much aware of gdb test suite.
> would you please guide me about how I can put the things in the testsuite ?
> is it the testsuite which comes along with the gdb source ?
> gdb\testsuite\gdb.base ??
> Regards,
> Oza.
>
> --- On Tue, 6/30/09, Pedro Alves <pedro@codesourcery.com> wrote:
>
>> From: Pedro Alves <pedro@codesourcery.com>
>> Subject: Re: i386.record.floating.point.patch : with more testing and assurity
>> To: gdb-patches@sourceware.org
>> Cc: "paawan oza" <paawan1982@yahoo.com>, teawater@gmail.com
>> Date: Tuesday, June 30, 2009, 7:09 PM
>> On Tuesday 30 June 2009 14:23:30,
>> paawan oza wrote:
>> >
>> > > As suggested by Hui,
>> > > I have come up with more detailed and granular
>> test case
>> > > for the patch which I had submitted last week.
>>
>> Could you please consider migrating that test into the
>> testsuite?
>> You've gone through the trouble of writing tests to make
>> sure
>> the features work now --- putting it in the testsuite means
>> we
>> have an automatic-ish means to check that it doesn't get
>> inadvertently broken in the future.? The way it is,
>> when your
>> code gets in, the test will probably end up lost in the
>> archives.
>> We wouldn't want that, would we?? :-)? Having
>> auto-tests, also helps
>> the person doing the review in confirming things work as
>> expected (without much effort).
>>
>> --
>> Pedro Alves
>>
>
>
>
>