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] |
Kris Warkentin <kewarken@qnx.com> wrote: > > Any reason why you can't use the generic register support in > > i386-tdep.c? > > Actually, I take advantage of the i387 generics for the floating point > regs since our kernel just uses the opcode to push them in the normal > order. Unfortunately though, our gpregs are in a different order and > not all of them are there so we have some unique mappings. QNX NTO is in no way special about this. I was thinking about something like the attached patch. Could you test that one? This approach simply reduces the amount of code needed. The patch also contains a unrelated change to the shared library code. It also removes a unneeded function. But it'd be nice if you could test that I didn't mess things up. Mark
Attachment:
patch
Description: Binary data
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |