From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 12572 invoked by alias); 20 Jun 2007 14:09:15 -0000 Received: (qmail 12559 invoked by uid 22791); 20 Jun 2007 14:09:14 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from NaN.false.org (HELO nan.false.org) (208.75.86.248) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Wed, 20 Jun 2007 14:09:11 +0000 Received: from nan.false.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by nan.false.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 02C3E982E6; Wed, 20 Jun 2007 14:09:10 +0000 (GMT) Received: from caradoc.them.org (22.svnf5.xdsl.nauticom.net [209.195.183.55]) by nan.false.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CEBC2982BA; Wed, 20 Jun 2007 14:09:09 +0000 (GMT) Received: from drow by caradoc.them.org with local (Exim 4.67) (envelope-from ) id 1I10s9-0007hJ-AO; Wed, 20 Jun 2007 10:09:25 -0400 Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2007 14:09:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: "Maciej W. Rozycki" Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org, insight@sourceware.org, Nigel Stephens , "Maciej W. Rozycki" , Eli Zaretskii Subject: Re: Disassemble branch delay slot instructions automatically Message-ID: <20070620140925.GA29461@caradoc.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: "Maciej W. Rozycki" , gdb-patches@sourceware.org, insight@sourceware.org, Nigel Stephens , "Maciej W. Rozycki" , Eli Zaretskii References: <20070516153242.GA8062@caradoc.them.org> <20070613165622.GA1023@caradoc.them.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.15 (2007-04-09) Mailing-List: contact insight-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: insight-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2007-q2/txt/msg00080.txt.bz2 On Wed, Jun 20, 2007 at 02:56:20PM +0100, Maciej W. Rozycki wrote: > On Wed, 13 Jun 2007, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote: > > > I think the patch is pretty much OK, except for the use of > > TARGET_PRINT_INSN. We're trying to eliminate the gdbarch macros now. > > I think the best solution would be to add the extra argument to > > gdb_print_insn; it's only used here and in the TUI. > > And also in Insight; I have updated that too. I suppose the plan is to > substitute TARGET_PRINT_INSN with gdbarch_print_insn(), but that should be > done separately, so that it is not mixed with functional changes. In fact, it happened yesterday. 2007-06-19 Markus Deuling * gdbarch.sh (TARGET_PRINT_INSN): Replace by gdbarch_print_insn. * disasm.c (dump_insns, gdb_print_insn): Likewise. * gdbarch.c, gdbarch.h: Regenerate. So I imagine you need to refresh this patch. I was actually suggesting you add the disassemble_info argument to gdb_print_insn, not the number of delay slots; but this way seems fine too. This version is OK, if Eli likes the NEWS entry and you add a Makefile.in update (since you added #include's). Eli, is the below OK? > Index: binutils-quilt/src/gdb/NEWS > =================================================================== > --- binutils-quilt.orig/src/gdb/NEWS 2007-06-19 12:24:32.000000000 +0100 > +++ binutils-quilt/src/gdb/NEWS 2007-06-19 15:16:19.000000000 +0100 > @@ -41,6 +41,9 @@ > layout. It also supports a TextSeg= and DataSeg= response when only > segment base addresses (rather than offsets) are available. > > +* The /i format now outputs any trailing branch delay slot instructions > +immediately following the last instruction within the count specified. > + > * New commands > > set remoteflow > -- Daniel Jacobowitz CodeSourcery