From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 9864 invoked by alias); 28 May 2003 23:46:52 -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 9828 invoked from network); 28 May 2003 23:46:51 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO stardust.solidas.com) (217.13.28.68) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 28 May 2003 23:46:51 -0000 Received: from solidas.com (217-13-28-83.dd.nextgentel.com [217.13.28.83]) (authenticated) by stardust.solidas.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h4SNkol29746 for ; Thu, 29 May 2003 01:46:50 +0200 Message-ID: <3ED54A80.3030900@solidas.com> Date: Wed, 28 May 2003 23:46:00 -0000 From: "Svein E. Seldal" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.3.1) Gecko/20030521 Debian/1.3.1-1 X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: gdb@sources.redhat.com Subject: FP aliases Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2003-05/txt/msg00380.txt.bz2 Hi, From the docs in gdb/std-regs.c:75, value_of_builtin_frame_fp_reg() it states that it will automagically use any registers named "fp" as fp (instead of using the deprecated fp functions). So what I read is that I need to reply "fp" in one of the registers in the set_gdbarch_register_name() function, right? For my arch, the tic4x, there is no hardware registers named "fp". Is it wise to replace my "ar3" with "fp". Users will probably get confused when they are introduced to the "fp" register, as they do not know the physical relation. But it states that I can create an alias. How? And why is that dangerous? I also observere that for the d10v target, no register is named "fp", but still they manage to do without the the deprecated fp functions. How is that? Regards, Svein