}
}
-/* Convert a dbx stab or Dwarf 2 register number (from `r'
- declaration) to a gdb REGNUM. */
+/* Convert a DBX STABS register number to a GDB register number. */
static int
-rs6000_dwarf2_stab_reg_to_regnum (int num)
+rs6000_stab_reg_to_regnum (int num)
{
struct gdbarch_tdep *tdep = gdbarch_tdep (current_gdbarch);
specifies registers the architecture doesn't have? Our
callers don't check the value we return. */
return tdep->ppc_fp0_regnum + (num - 32);
+ else if (77 <= num && num <= 108)
+ return tdep->ppc_vr0_regnum + (num - 77);
else if (1200 <= num && num < 1200 + 32)
return tdep->ppc_ev0_regnum + (num - 1200);
else
return tdep->ppc_xer_regnum;
case 109:
return tdep->ppc_vrsave_regnum;
+ case 110:
+ return tdep->ppc_vrsave_regnum - 1; /* vscr */
case 111:
- return gdbarch_tdep (current_gdbarch)->ppc_acc_regnum;
+ return tdep->ppc_acc_regnum;
case 112:
- return gdbarch_tdep (current_gdbarch)->ppc_spefscr_regnum;
+ return tdep->ppc_spefscr_regnum;
default:
return num;
}
+}
- /* FIXME: jimb/2004-03-28: Doesn't something need to be done here
- for the Altivec registers, too?
- Looking at GCC, the headers in config/rs6000 never define a
- DBX_REGISTER_NUMBER macro, so the debug info uses the same
- numbers GCC does internally. Then, looking at the REGISTER_NAMES
- macro defined in config/rs6000/rs6000.h, it seems that GCC gives
- v0 -- v31 the numbers 77 -- 108. But we number them 119 -- 150.
+/* Convert a Dwarf 2 register number to a GDB register number. */
+static int
+rs6000_dwarf2_reg_to_regnum (int num)
+{
+ struct gdbarch_tdep *tdep = gdbarch_tdep (current_gdbarch);
- I don't have a way to test this ready to hand, but I noticed it
- and thought I should include a note. */
+ if (0 <= num && num <= 31)
+ return tdep->ppc_gp0_regnum + num;
+ else if (32 <= num && num <= 63)
+ /* FIXME: jimb/2004-05-05: What should we do when the debug info
+ specifies registers the architecture doesn't have? Our
+ callers don't check the value we return. */
+ return tdep->ppc_fp0_regnum + (num - 32);
+ else if (1124 <= num && num < 1124 + 32)
+ return tdep->ppc_vr0_regnum + (num - 1124);
+ else if (1200 <= num && num < 1200 + 32)
+ return tdep->ppc_ev0_regnum + (num - 1200);
+ else
+ switch (num)
+ {
+ case 67:
+ return tdep->ppc_vrsave_regnum - 1; /* vscr */
+ case 99:
+ return tdep->ppc_acc_regnum;
+ case 100:
+ return tdep->ppc_mq_regnum;
+ case 101:
+ return tdep->ppc_xer_regnum;
+ case 108:
+ return tdep->ppc_lr_regnum;
+ case 109:
+ return tdep->ppc_ctr_regnum;
+ case 356:
+ return tdep->ppc_vrsave_regnum;
+ case 612:
+ return tdep->ppc_spefscr_regnum;
+ default:
+ return num;
+ }
}
+
static void
rs6000_store_return_value (struct type *type, char *valbuf)
{
set_gdbarch_deprecated_register_convertible (gdbarch, rs6000_register_convertible);
set_gdbarch_deprecated_register_convert_to_virtual (gdbarch, rs6000_register_convert_to_virtual);
set_gdbarch_deprecated_register_convert_to_raw (gdbarch, rs6000_register_convert_to_raw);
- set_gdbarch_stab_reg_to_regnum (gdbarch, rs6000_dwarf2_stab_reg_to_regnum);
- set_gdbarch_dwarf2_reg_to_regnum (gdbarch, rs6000_dwarf2_stab_reg_to_regnum);
+ set_gdbarch_stab_reg_to_regnum (gdbarch, rs6000_stab_reg_to_regnum);
+ set_gdbarch_dwarf2_reg_to_regnum (gdbarch, rs6000_dwarf2_reg_to_regnum);
/* Note: kevinb/2002-04-12: I'm not convinced that rs6000_push_arguments()
is correct for the SysV ABI when the wordsize is 8, but I'm also
fairly certain that ppc_sysv_abi_push_arguments() will give even