From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gdb-return-12853-listarch-gdb=sources.redhat.com@sources.redhat.com>
Received: (qmail 9027 invoked by alias); 1 Mar 2003 22:46:39 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gdb-subscribe@sources.redhat.com>
List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/gdb/>
List-Post: <mailto:gdb@sources.redhat.com>
List-Help: <mailto:gdb-help@sources.redhat.com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender: gdb-owner@sources.redhat.com
Received: (qmail 9002 invoked from network); 1 Mar 2003 22:46:38 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO walton.kettenis.dyndns.org) (62.163.169.212)
  by 172.16.49.205 with SMTP; 1 Mar 2003 22:46:38 -0000
Received: from elgar.kettenis.dyndns.org (elgar.kettenis.dyndns.org [192.168.0.2])
	by walton.kettenis.dyndns.org (8.12.6/8.12.5) with ESMTP id h21MkTUb000468;
	Sat, 1 Mar 2003 23:46:29 +0100 (CET)
	(envelope-from kettenis@elgar.kettenis.dyndns.org)
Received: from elgar.kettenis.dyndns.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by elgar.kettenis.dyndns.org (8.12.6/8.12.6) with ESMTP id h21MkTVZ035393;
	Sat, 1 Mar 2003 23:46:29 +0100 (CET)
	(envelope-from kettenis@elgar.kettenis.dyndns.org)
Received: (from kettenis@localhost)
	by elgar.kettenis.dyndns.org (8.12.6/8.12.6/Submit) id h21MkTc2035390;
	Sat, 1 Mar 2003 23:46:29 +0100 (CET)
Date: Sat, 01 Mar 2003 22:46:00 -0000
Message-Id: <200303012246.h21MkTc2035390@elgar.kettenis.dyndns.org>
From: Mark Kettenis <kettenis@chello.nl>
To: mec@shout.net
CC: brobecker@gnat.com, gdb@sources.redhat.com
In-reply-to: <200303012057.h21KvFv26400@duracef.shout.net> (message from
	Michael Elizabeth Chastain on Sat, 1 Mar 2003 14:57:15 -0600)
Subject: Re: 8-byte register values on a 32-bit machine
References:  <200303012057.h21KvFv26400@duracef.shout.net>
X-SW-Source: 2003-03/txt/msg00013.txt.bz2

   Date: Sat, 1 Mar 2003 14:57:15 -0600
   From: Michael Elizabeth Chastain <mec@shout.net>

   The heinous part is that gdb *knows* it is pulling some register
   value out of its ass for p1.y.  I understand that on some targets,
   gcc and gdb might agree on register number allocation (ignore for
   the moment that there are other compilers besides gcc).  Okay, for
   targets where we have a guarantee about that, then enable
   sequential register access.  But i686-pc-linux-gnu is definitely
   not such a target.

I don't agree with the defenitely here.  GCC has been allocating the
registers in a well determined order for at least 10 years now.

Mark