Re: Unifying the x86 FPU register sets

[jtc at redback dot com (J.T. Conklin)]

>>>>> "Jim" == Jim Blandy <jimb@cygnus.com> writes:
>> Don't you think we need to make this run-time selectable based on
>> processor type?  For example, we have I/O cards with 386ex's with
>> no FPU at all and forwarding engine that uses a pentium MMX.  I'd
>> like to support both with a single GDB.

Jim> Yes.  It's my understanding that we can accomplish this with the
Jim> gdbarch mechanism.

I was checking the rs6000/powerpc target (the other target I'm most
familiar with), and NUM_REGS and REGISTER_BYTES are both set to the
largest number for any powerpc varient.  There is no REGISTER_NAMES
array, being replaced by a REGISTER_NAME() function which returns ""
for registers not present for the selected varient.  This seems a 
easy enough thing to do now before adding HAVE_FPU_REGS, etc. to
derived target's tm-* headers.

        --jtc

-- 
J.T. Conklin
RedBack Networks