From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 19859 invoked by alias); 5 Mar 2010 02:06:21 -0000 Received: (qmail 19726 invoked by uid 22791); 5 Mar 2010 02:06:19 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.8 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SARE_MSGID_LONG40 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mail-wy0-f169.google.com (HELO mail-wy0-f169.google.com) (74.125.82.169) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Fri, 05 Mar 2010 02:06:14 +0000 Received: by wyb29 with SMTP id 29so1717629wyb.0 for ; Thu, 04 Mar 2010 18:06:11 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.216.85.5 with SMTP id t5mr250638wee.176.1267754771776; Thu, 04 Mar 2010 18:06:11 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <20100304214723.GA2817@caradoc.them.org> References: <20100304180219.GA10826@intel.com> <20100304190934.GB15979@caradoc.them.org> <6dc9ffc81003041129i72a8a79bn66721fecc7b6a83b@mail.gmail.com> <20100304194645.GA20453@caradoc.them.org> <6dc9ffc81003041327m379c6903g571f4d66aac8d61a@mail.gmail.com> <20100304214723.GA2817@caradoc.them.org> Date: Fri, 05 Mar 2010 02:06:00 -0000 Message-ID: <6dc9ffc81003041806q5659ba84md02fbc75cd283e0d@mail.gmail.com> Subject: Re: PATCH: 1/6: Add AVX support From: "H.J. Lu" To: "H.J. Lu" , GDB Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2010-03/txt/msg00222.txt.bz2 On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 1:47 PM, Daniel Jacobowitz wr= ote: > On Thu, Mar 04, 2010 at 01:27:09PM -0800, H.J. Lu wrote: >> > No, it will fail to display SSE. =A0Core debugging should still be >> > possible, and the newly added registers will be visible too. =A0If >> > that's not the case, fix GDB to function with the SSE registers >> > missing. >> >> Your description only works for truly NEW registers, which >> AVX registers aren't. =A0AVX registers are actually the old SSE >> registers with different names. > > I'm trying to get you to think about compatibility in the > descriptions, instead of separately in the remote protocol. > There are always ways to solve it. =A0For instance, you could present > both the AVX registers and the hypothetical newer, larger registers as > separate things. =A0As long as the P packet is implemented, which it is, > GDB should work OK if modifying one register changes another. > I don't know if there's an example of this in the GDB sources, but I > have one in my tree; there's $sp, $sp_user, and $sp_system registers, > and $sp is the same as one of the other two depending on processor > mode. =A0But they're all visible. > > Another solution is to define new registers which correspond to the > added bits, and have a sufficiently recent GDB synthesize the combined > registers from the AVX registers and the new bits. =A0This, for > instance, is how the Power E500 registers are handled > (rs6000/power-spe.xml). > OK, I will try SPE approach. It will take a while. Thanks. --=20 H.J.