This is the mail archive of the gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com mailing list for the GDB project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: [rfa/mips] Second go at vr5500 hilo hazard fix


cgd@broadcom.com writes:
> Now that the mips sim 'multi' bits are in place (including good
> default), and we have MIPS_MACH(SD) (thanks! 8-), it should be
> possible to code a simple macro which checks for the appropriate bfd
> machine, and decides whether interlocks are present.

Well, I had a similar check in:

    http://sources.redhat.com/ml/gdb-patches/2002-11/msg00642.html

OK, so it wasn't wrapped up in a nice macro, it just checked the
architecture directly:

+   /* There are no timing requirements in vr5500 code.  */
+   if (MIPS_MACH (SD) == bfd_mach_mips5500)
+     return 1;

But that was exactly what Andrew objected to:

    http://sources.redhat.com/ml/gdb-patches/2002-11/msg00668.html

Then there was:

    http://sources.redhat.com/ml/gdb-patches/2002-12/msg00080.html

To quote:

    As for having to tag each individual entry in the .igen file with an
    explicit CPU. Yes, that sux. However, I also believe that it has
    significantly reduced the overall error rate (no more breaking one
    target by editing another) and that benefit vastly outweighs the short
    term pain.

Richard


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]