From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 9438 invoked by alias); 3 Oct 2003 21:22:42 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 9427 invoked from network); 3 Oct 2003 21:22:38 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (66.187.233.31) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 3 Oct 2003 21:22:38 -0000 Received: from int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (int-mx1.corp.redhat.com [172.16.52.254]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h93LMb111224 for ; Fri, 3 Oct 2003 17:22:37 -0400 Received: from pobox.corp.redhat.com (pobox.corp.redhat.com [172.16.52.156]) by int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h93LMbc32068 for ; Fri, 3 Oct 2003 17:22:37 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain (vpn50-46.rdu.redhat.com [172.16.50.46]) by pobox.corp.redhat.com (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id h93LMabe007031; Fri, 3 Oct 2003 17:22:37 -0400 Received: (from kev@localhost) by localhost.localdomain (8.11.6/8.11.6) id h93LMVq26625; Fri, 3 Oct 2003 14:22:31 -0700 Date: Fri, 03 Oct 2003 21:22:00 -0000 From: Kevin Buettner Message-Id: <1031003212231.ZM26624@localhost.localdomain> In-Reply-To: Andrew Cagney "Re: [rfa:ppc64] Fix 64-bit PPC ELF function calls" (Sep 22, 1:59pm) References: <3F6E368C.30009@redhat.com> <3F6F388D.5020706@redhat.com> To: Andrew Cagney , gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [rfa:ppc64] Fix 64-bit PPC ELF function calls MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-SW-Source: 2003-10/txt/msg00059.txt.bz2 Sorry for not replying sooner. I thought I had replied to this already... On Sep 22, 1:59pm, Andrew Cagney wrote: > > PS: The apparent bugs are: > > > > - small odd structs get passed in memory instead of a register > > (ref structs.exp:Fun3). > > - small even structs get passed right, instead of left, aligned in > > the register (ref structs.exp:Fun[12]). These are all GCC bugs, right? And, if they get fixed in GCC, then GDB will be broken? > > PS: Backtraces are a bit sick. In what way? > > PPS: Oh, note the "hack" to find the TOC from the function's > > entry point address. Without it malloc() fails. Calls to other library functions would fail too. Is the TOC symbol name vs entry point name (i.e, FN vs..FN) convention mandated by the ABI, or is this something that's Linux specific? I notice some 80+ character lines in ppc64_sysv_abi_push_dummy_call(). Could you adjust these so that they're 80 characters or less? Also, a minor nit: in the comment... /* Find a value for the TOC register. Every symbol should have both ".FN" and "FN" in the minimal symbol table. "FN" points at the F's descriptor, while ".FN" points at the entry point (which matches FUNC_ADDR). Need to reverse from FUNC_ADDR back to the FN's descriptor address. */ ...at the beginning of the third line down, shouldn't that be: FN's descriptor, [...] If not, what does `F' refer to? Kevin