This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: i386.record.floating.point.patch : with more testing and assurity
- From: paawan oza <paawan1982 at yahoo dot com>
- To: Pedro Alves <pedro at codesourcery dot com>, Mark Kettenis <mark dot kettenis at xs4all dot nl>, Michael Snyder <msnyder at vmware dot com>, Hui Zhu <teawater at gmail dot com>
- Cc: gdb-patches at sourceware dot org
- Date: Wed, 1 Jul 2009 08:59:05 -0700 (PDT)
- Subject: Re: i386.record.floating.point.patch : with more testing and assurity
As I clarified earlier,
these registers are already supported and extended by gdb much before this patch.
all floating point registers are already supported by gdb
(info floats/info all-registers command gives it)
My aim is : only to make sure that whenever any floating point insn gets executed, we record the registers
(no matter whether it is %st(n) or FCTRL or FTAG or FSTATUS)
there are insns
e.g. 'ffree' changes FTAG register, so we must record it.
Do you mean to say that we should remove it from just enumaration ?
but anyway we need to record those registers.
--- On Wed, 7/1/09, Hui Zhu <email@example.com> wrote:
> From: Hui Zhu <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> Subject: Re: i386.record.floating.point.patch : with more testing and assurity
> To: "paawan oza" <email@example.com>, "Pedro Alves" <firstname.lastname@example.org>, "Mark Kettenis" <email@example.com>, "Michael Snyder" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> Cc: email@example.com
> Date: Wednesday, July 1, 2009, 11:23 AM
> About this patch, I say my idea
> again, I told in
> @@ -145,7 +145,22 @@
> ??? /* %es */
> ??? /* %fs */
> ??? /* %gs */
> -? I386_ST0_REGNUM???
> ??? /* %st(0) */
> +? I386_ST0_REGNUM,???
> ??? /* %st(0) */
> +? I386_ST1_REGNUM,???
> ??? /* %st(1) */
> +? I386_ST2_REGNUM,???
> ??? /* %st(2) */
> +? I386_ST3_REGNUM,???
> ??? /* %st(3) */
> +? I386_ST4_REGNUM,???
> ??? /* %st(4) */
> +? I386_ST5_REGNUM,???
> ??? /* %st(5) */
> +? I386_ST6_REGNUM,???
> ??? /* %st(6) */
> +? I386_ST7_REGNUM,???
> ??? /* %st(7) */
> +? I386_FCTRL,??? ???
> ??? /* floating point env regs : FCTRL-FOP
> +? I386_FSTAT,
> +? I386_FTAG,??? ???
> +? I386_FISEG,
> +? I386_FIOFF,
> +? I386_FOSEG,
> +? I386_FOOFF,
> +? I386_FOP
> You are working on make prec x86 support fp insn, not to
> extend the fp
> function of i386 (If you want, you can make a special patch
> for it).
> On Tue, Jun 30, 2009 at 23:05, paawan oza<firstname.lastname@example.org>
> > Hi,
> > As I am submitting the patch for the first time, I am
> not much aware of gdb test suite.
> > would you please guide me about how I can put the
> things in the testsuite ?
> > is it the testsuite which comes along with the gdb
> source ?
> > gdb\testsuite\gdb.base ??
> > Regards,
> > Oza.
> > --- On Tue, 6/30/09, Pedro Alves <email@example.com>
> >> From: Pedro Alves <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> >> Subject: Re: i386.record.floating.point.patch :
> with more testing and assurity
> >> To: email@example.com
> >> Cc: "paawan oza" <firstname.lastname@example.org>,
> >> Date: Tuesday, June 30, 2009, 7:09 PM
> >> On Tuesday 30 June 2009 14:23:30,
> >> paawan oza wrote:
> >> >
> >> > > As suggested by Hui,
> >> > > I have come up with more detailed and
> >> test case
> >> > > for the patch which I had submitted last
> >> Could you please consider migrating that test into
> >> testsuite?
> >> You've gone through the trouble of writing tests
> to make
> >> sure
> >> the features work now --- putting it in the
> testsuite means
> >> we
> >> have an automatic-ish means to check that it
> doesn't get
> >> inadvertently broken in the future.? The way it
> >> when your
> >> code gets in, the test will probably end up lost
> in the
> >> archives.
> >> We wouldn't want that, would we?? :-)? Having
> >> auto-tests, also helps
> >> the person doing the review in confirming things
> work as
> >> expected (without much effort).
> >> --
> >> Pedro Alves