On Thu, Jul 13, 2006 at 11:23:49AM -0400, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
> Corinna, what do you think? The context is the remote protocol reply
> "rwatch:0x80000000"; a bug previously caused this to be sign extended,
> but now that's been fixed. So I'm afraid we now have the same bug you
> were both trying to fix back again.
Maybe we should be using gdbarch_integer_to_address here too?
Or maybe that hook ought to be completely removed and consolidated with
something else. There's a whole bunch of related hooks. With your
recent change, mips_integer_to_address basically matches
signed_pointer_to_address.
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery