A matter of taste?

[Andreas Schwab]

Corinna Vinschen <vinschen@redhat.com> writes:

|> Hi,
|> 
|> I'm currently substituting a bunch of calls to REGISTER_RAW_SIZE.
|> Since REGISTER_RAW_SIZE should be removed entirely, I was wondering
|> how to do it most nicely.
|> 
|> What I don't quite get is the implementation of function register_size
|> in regcache.c.  It retrieves the size of the regsiter from the 
|> regcache and then checks twice(!) if that size equals REGISTER_RAW_SIZE.

The second check probabably should have been against
REGISTER_VIRTUAL_SIZE.

|> If I understand that correctly, a multi-arched target which got rid of
|> REGISTER_RAW_SIZE can't use register_size () since the REGISTER_RAW_SIZE
|> calls in register_size will raise an internal_error in
|> gdbarch_deprecated_register_raw_size().

If you don't define REGISTER_RAW_SIZE then it is defined to
generic_register_size, which uses TYPE_LENGTH.

|> What is that good for?  And what's the substitute for a target with
|> no REGISTER_RAW_SIZE implementation?

Just use register_size.  Works fine on m68k.

Andreas.

-- 
Andreas Schwab, SuSE Labs, schwab@suse.de
SuSE Linux AG, Deutschherrnstr. 15-19, D-90429 Nürnberg
Key fingerprint = 58CA 54C7 6D53 942B 1756  01D3 44D5 214B 8276 4ED5
"And now for something completely different."