[rfa/mips] Second go at vr5500 hilo hazard fix
Richard Sandiford
rsandifo@redhat.com
Fri Mar 19 00:09:00 GMT 2004
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
More information about the Gdb-patches
mailing list