Hi!

Ping.


On Thu, 30 Aug 2012 17:37:45 +0200, I wrote:
> On Wed, 29 Aug 2012 17:36:54 +0200, I wrote:
> > On Fri, 10 Aug 2012 16:31:47 +0200, Mark Kettenis <mark.kettenis@xs4all.nl> wrote:
> > > > Date: Fri, 10 Aug 2012 14:56:46 +0200 (CEST)
> > > > From: "Ulrich Weigand" <uweigand@de.ibm.com>
> > > > 
> > > > Yao Qi wrote:
> > > > > On Friday, August 10, 2012 11:32:53 AM Thomas Schwinge wrote:
> > > > > > That is, if set_gdbarch_double_format has not been called, it will
> > > > > > default to floatformats_ieee_double -- even though set_gdbarch_double_bit
> > > > > > may have been called setting it unequal to the 64-bit double format.
> > > > > > Hmm, and gdbarch.c:verify_gdbarch has the following comment on top of it:
> > > > > > Ensure that all values in a GDBARCH are reasonable.  ;-)
> > > > > 
> > > > > Looks like some checking like this is missing?
> > > > > 
> > > > >   gdbarch->float_format->totalsize <= gdbarch->float_bit
> > > > >   gdbarch->double_format->totalsize <= gdbarch->double_bit
> > > > 
> > > > In fact, I'd prefer to make gdbarch_double_format etc. *mandatory*
> > > > and gdbarch_double_bit etc. optional, defaulting to the format size.
> > > > (Currently, _bit is mandatory and _format is optional.)
> > > > 
> > > > This would mean that nearly all calls to set_gdbarch_double_bit
> > > > could go away, with the exception of special cases like "long double"
> > > > on i386 ...
> > > 
> > > Initializing _bit based on _format by default makes sense, but I don't
> > > think this is easy to implement given the way how the gdbarch.c code
> > > is generated.
> > > 
> > > Making _format mandatory doesn't make sense to me though.  I'd say
> > > that ieee_single and ieee_double are perfectly reasonable defaults for
> > > float_format and double_format.
> > 
> > Is there a reasonable way for at least detecting the mismatch that I
> > happened to observe for SH?
> > 
> > 
> > Other than that, OK to check in the following?  I have only tested the SH
> > bits; no maintainer listed for h8300, Stephane CCed for m68hc11.
> 
> Stephane Carrez' email address <stcarrez@nerim.fr> (as listed in
> gdb/MAINTAINERS) bounces saying »unknown user«, but I found another one
> in the GCC context -- Stephane, is this you?  If yes, please update the
> three occurences of your old email address in gdb/MAINTAINERS (and
> possibly other files, too).
> 
> Kevin, I'm also adding you to the CC list, as you've been helpful with SH
> issues before -- should you be listed as a maintainer for SH?
> 
> And what about the h8300 bits?
> 
> > gdb/
> > 	* h8300-tdep.c (h8300_gdbarch_init): Invoke
> > 	set_gdbarch_double_format and set_gdbarch_long_double_format.
> > 	* m68hc11-tdep.c (m68hc11_gdbarch_init): Invoke
> > 	set_gdbarch_double_format.
> > 	* sh-tdep.c (sh_gdbarch_init): Likewise.
> > 
> > diff --git a/gdb/h8300-tdep.c b/gdb/h8300-tdep.c
> > index 7fc4daa..bcb769e 100644
> > --- a/gdb/h8300-tdep.c
> > +++ b/gdb/h8300-tdep.c
> > @@ -1351,7 +1351,9 @@ h8300_gdbarch_init (struct gdbarch_info info, struct gdbarch_list *arches)
> >    set_gdbarch_long_bit (gdbarch, 4 * TARGET_CHAR_BIT);
> >    set_gdbarch_long_long_bit (gdbarch, 8 * TARGET_CHAR_BIT);
> >    set_gdbarch_double_bit (gdbarch, 4 * TARGET_CHAR_BIT);
> > +  set_gdbarch_double_format (gdbarch, floatformats_ieee_single);
> >    set_gdbarch_long_double_bit (gdbarch, 4 * TARGET_CHAR_BIT);
> > +  set_gdbarch_long_double_format (gdbarch, floatformats_ieee_single);
> >  
> >    set_gdbarch_believe_pcc_promotion (gdbarch, 1);
> >  
> > diff --git a/gdb/m68hc11-tdep.c b/gdb/m68hc11-tdep.c
> > index 79629ef..cd32459 100644
> > --- a/gdb/m68hc11-tdep.c
> > +++ b/gdb/m68hc11-tdep.c
> > @@ -1498,7 +1498,16 @@ m68hc11_gdbarch_init (struct gdbarch_info info,
> >    set_gdbarch_short_bit (gdbarch, 16);
> >    set_gdbarch_int_bit (gdbarch, elf_flags & E_M68HC11_I32 ? 32 : 16);
> >    set_gdbarch_float_bit (gdbarch, 32);
> > -  set_gdbarch_double_bit (gdbarch, elf_flags & E_M68HC11_F64 ? 64 : 32);
> > +  if (elf_flags & E_M68HC11_F64)
> > +    {
> > +      set_gdbarch_double_bit (gdbarch, 64);
> > +      set_gdbarch_double_format (gdbarch, floatformats_ieee_double);
> > +    }
> > +  else
> > +    {
> > +      set_gdbarch_double_bit (gdbarch, 32);
> > +      set_gdbarch_double_format (gdbarch, floatformats_ieee_single);
> > +    }
> >    set_gdbarch_long_double_bit (gdbarch, 64);
> >    set_gdbarch_long_bit (gdbarch, 32);
> >    set_gdbarch_ptr_bit (gdbarch, 16);
> > diff --git a/gdb/sh-tdep.c b/gdb/sh-tdep.c
> > index 1ede13a..caf940d 100644
> > --- a/gdb/sh-tdep.c
> > +++ b/gdb/sh-tdep.c
> > @@ -2299,6 +2299,7 @@ sh_gdbarch_init (struct gdbarch_info info, struct gdbarch_list *arches)
> >      case bfd_mach_sh2e:
> >        /* doubles on sh2e and sh3e are actually 4 byte.  */
> >        set_gdbarch_double_bit (gdbarch, 4 * TARGET_CHAR_BIT);
> > +      set_gdbarch_double_format (gdbarch, floatformats_ieee_single);
> >  
> >        set_gdbarch_register_name (gdbarch, sh_sh2e_register_name);
> >        set_gdbarch_register_type (gdbarch, sh_sh3e_register_type);
> > @@ -2344,6 +2345,7 @@ sh_gdbarch_init (struct gdbarch_info info, struct gdbarch_list *arches)
> >      case bfd_mach_sh2a_or_sh3e:
> >        /* doubles on sh2e and sh3e are actually 4 byte.  */
> >        set_gdbarch_double_bit (gdbarch, 4 * TARGET_CHAR_BIT);
> > +      set_gdbarch_double_format (gdbarch, floatformats_ieee_single);
> >  
> >        set_gdbarch_register_name (gdbarch, sh_sh3e_register_name);
> >        set_gdbarch_register_type (gdbarch, sh_sh3e_register_type);


Grüße,
 Thomas