Mirror of the gdb-patches mailing list
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Luis Machado <luisgpm@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Ulrich Weigand <uweigand@de.ibm.com>
Cc: Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@false.org>, gdb-patches@sourceware.org
Subject: Re: [rfc] Simplify ppc64_sysv_abi_adjust_breakpoint_address
Date: Tue, 07 Oct 2008 16:31:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1223397031.612.26.camel@gargoyle> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200805161253.m4GCrRqL011333@d12av02.megacenter.de.ibm.com>

Hi folks,

Resurrecting this one...

It seems we have a situation in which
"ppc64_sysv_abi_adjust_breakpoint_address" is still required, in a way.

Before removing this function, GDB was smart enough to know that the
entry point of a 64-bit PPC binary is, in reality, a function
descriptor, thus grabbing the correct breakpoint location from within
that address and setting it correctly.

After removing this function, GDB no longer knows that a specific
address is a function descriptor, and places a breakpoint at a data
section. The binary's code tries to fetch the correct address from the
function descriptor's address and ends up fetching the breakpoint
instruction, which makes no sense.

So, i see two ways:

1 - Make GDB smart again, being able to determine if the address is of a
function descriptor or not, basically the way i was before this patch.

2 - Assume the user knows what he's doing and that he knows where to
place a breakpoint when using the address of a function descriptor.

Regards,
Luis

On Fri, 2008-05-16 at 14:53 +0200, Ulrich Weigand wrote:
> Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
> > On Thu, May 15, 2008 at 01:02:00AM +0200, Ulrich Weigand wrote:
> > > Thus I'd propose to remove that code.  Any objections?
> > 
> > Hooray!  I like this.
> 
> Checked in as well.
> 
> Thanks,
> Ulrich
> 


  reply	other threads:[~2008-10-07 16:31 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2008-05-15 10:11 Ulrich Weigand
2008-05-15 17:03 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2008-05-16 16:21   ` Ulrich Weigand
2008-10-07 16:31     ` Luis Machado [this message]
2008-10-09 17:53       ` Ulrich Weigand
2008-10-09 17:57         ` Luis Machado
2008-10-09 17:59           ` Ulrich Weigand
2008-10-09 18:02             ` Luis Machado
2008-10-09 18:06               ` Ulrich Weigand
2008-10-09 18:06                 ` Luis Machado

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=1223397031.612.26.camel@gargoyle \
    --to=luisgpm@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=drow@false.org \
    --cc=gdb-patches@sourceware.org \
    --cc=uweigand@de.ibm.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox