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
>
next prev parent 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