From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gdb-patches-return-140144-listarch-gdb-patches=sources.redhat.com@sourceware.org>
Received: (qmail 99196 invoked by alias); 28 Jun 2017 15:30:56 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gdb-patches.sourceware.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gdb-patches-subscribe@sourceware.org>
List-Archive: <http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/>
List-Post: <mailto:gdb-patches@sourceware.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org
Received: (qmail 98857 invoked by uid 89); 28 Jun 2017 15:30:36 -0000
Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none
X-Virus-Found: No
X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.4 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_SORBS_SPAM,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS autolearn=no version=3.3.2 spammy=visit
X-HELO: mx1.redhat.com
Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Wed, 28 Jun 2017 15:30:35 +0000
Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx05.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.15])	(using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))	(No client certificate requested)	by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 417F713A8A;	Wed, 28 Jun 2017 15:30:31 +0000 (UTC)
DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mx1.redhat.com 417F713A8A
Authentication-Results: ext-mx05.extmail.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com
Authentication-Results: ext-mx05.extmail.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=palves@redhat.com
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 mx1.redhat.com 417F713A8A
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (ovpn04.gateway.prod.ext.ams2.redhat.com [10.39.146.4])	by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8FC6988C65;	Wed, 28 Jun 2017 15:30:30 +0000 (UTC)
Subject: Re: [PATCH 07/25] Lazily and dynamically create i386-linux target descriptions
To: Yao Qi <qiyaoltc@gmail.com>
References: <1497256916-4958-1-git-send-email-yao.qi@linaro.org> <1497256916-4958-8-git-send-email-yao.qi@linaro.org> <f84b34be-f4d5-6c87-86b2-048f2b6e08d7@redhat.com> <86k2464us8.fsf@gmail.com>
Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org
From: Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>
Message-ID: <fc353330-54f9-7d9f-b34d-d37a707995ad@redhat.com>
Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2017 15:30:00 -0000
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.4.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <86k2464us8.fsf@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-SW-Source: 2017-06/txt/msg00764.txt.bz2


On 06/20/2017 03:07 PM, Yao Qi wrote:
> Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com> writes:

>> Can you say something about the "regnum = %ld" change?  Is it
>> related to the rest of the patch?
>>

...

> Some reg in XML target description has attribute "regnum" which set the
> register number explicitly rather than using the sequentially allocated
> number,
> 
>   <reg name="xmm0" bitsize="128" type="vec128" regnum="32"/>
> 
> In order to handle this, this patch also changes the visitor to print
> the code to set regnum when reg has attribute "regnum".

I see.

   void visit (const tdesc_reg *reg) override
   {
+    if (reg->target_regnum > next_regnum)
+      {
+	printf_unfiltered ("  regnum = %ld;\n", reg->target_regnum);
+	next_regnum = reg->target_regnum;
+      }

I guess "reg->target_regnum < next_regnum" shouldn't ever
happen, right?  Should we add an assert?

Thanks,
Pedro Alves