From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gdb-patches-return-81838-listarch-gdb-patches=sources.redhat.com@sourceware.org>
Received: (qmail 16571 invoked by alias); 29 Jun 2011 07:00:35 -0000
Received: (qmail 16545 invoked by uid 22791); 29 Jun 2011 07:00:33 -0000
X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.7 required=5.0	tests=AWL,BAYES_00,MSGID_MULTIPLE_AT,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW
X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Received: from service87.mimecast.com (HELO service87.mimecast.com) (94.185.240.25)    by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with SMTP; Wed, 29 Jun 2011 07:00:19 +0000
Received: from cam-owa1.Emea.Arm.com (fw-tnat.cambridge.arm.com [217.140.96.21]) by service87.mimecast.com; Wed, 29 Jun 2011 08:00:16 +0100
Received: from Terrysh02 ([10.1.255.212]) by cam-owa1.Emea.Arm.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.0);	 Wed, 29 Jun 2011 08:00:12 +0100
From: "Terry Guo" <terry.guo@arm.com>
To: "'Yao Qi'" <yao@codesourcery.com>
Cc: <gdb-patches@sourceware.org>,	<pedro@codesourcery.com>
References: <000901cc34bc$fd1aa6a0$f74ff3e0$@guo@arm.com> <000101cc35fb$8d45ff60$a7d1fe20$@guo@arm.com> <4E0AB9B3.8060104@codesourcery.com>
In-Reply-To: <4E0AB9B3.8060104@codesourcery.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH] Fix that different function breakpoints are set at same pc address (PR gdb/12703)
Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2011 07:00:00 -0000
Message-ID: <000501cc362a$2e7f9020$8b7eb060$@guo@arm.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-MC-Unique: 111062908001602201
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-IsSubscribed: yes
Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gdb-patches.sourceware.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gdb-patches-subscribe@sourceware.org>
List-Archive: <http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/>
List-Post: <mailto:gdb-patches@sourceware.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org
X-SW-Source: 2011-06/txt/msg00436.txt.bz2

Hi,

Here is my case. As for stack backtrace, I wonder whether it works for the =
function that only contains one single instruction and function that doesn'=
t even has a valid prologue. I also saw that current prologue analyzer cann=
ot handle all cases, so I try to avoid this in a more general way.

unsigned long _etext;
unsigned long _data;
unsigned long _edata;
register unsigned long guard asm("r5");

void bar (void);
void test (void) __attribute__((naked));

void
foo (void)
{
  while(1)
    {
    }
} /* End of function foo.  */

void
test (void)
{
  guard =3D 10;
}

void
bar (void)
{
    unsigned long *pulSrc, *pulDest;

    pulSrc =3D &_etext;

    for (pulDest =3D &_data; pulDest < &_edata;)
      {
         *pulDest++ =3D *pulSrc++;
      }

    if (*pulSrc > guard)
      guard =3D 0;
    else
      guard =3D 1;
}

void
main (int argc, char **argv)
{
  test ();
}