From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 827 invoked by alias); 18 May 2005 09:29:14 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 715 invoked from network); 18 May 2005 09:29:07 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO cam-admin0.cambridge.arm.com) (193.131.176.58) by sourceware.org with SMTP; 18 May 2005 09:29:07 -0000 Received: from pc960.cambridge.arm.com (pc960.cambridge.arm.com [10.1.205.4]) by cam-admin0.cambridge.arm.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id j4I9SUeS002272; Wed, 18 May 2005 10:28:30 +0100 (BST) Received: from pc960.cambridge.arm.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by pc960.cambridge.arm.com (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id j4I9SZbC018566; Wed, 18 May 2005 10:28:35 +0100 Received: (from rearnsha@localhost) by pc960.cambridge.arm.com (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id j4I9SZc3018564; Wed, 18 May 2005 10:28:35 +0100 X-Authentication-Warning: pc960.cambridge.arm.com: rearnsha set sender to rearnsha@gcc.gnu.org using -f Subject: Re: RFC: Available registers as a target property From: Richard Earnshaw To: Daniel Jacobowitz Cc: gdb@sourceware.org In-Reply-To: <20050517193228.GB7337@nevyn.them.org> References: <20050506162029.GA30792@nevyn.them.org> <20050517193228.GB7337@nevyn.them.org> Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <1116408515.15608.40.camel@pc960.cambridge.arm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Date: Wed, 18 May 2005 09:29:00 -0000 X-SW-Source: 2005-05/txt/msg00177.txt.bz2 On Tue, 2005-05-17 at 20:32, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote: > /* If this flag is set, GDB should save and restore this register > around calls to an inferior function. */ > int save_restore; Why would the target care about this? It seems to be more a property of an ABI than the target. In the (IMO) unlikely case that we really want to keep this, I think it should have a 'not-my-responsibility-to-decide' setting. R.