* [Patch] fix for PR:1291
@ 2003-09-16 18:48 kewarken
2003-09-23 21:03 ` Elena Zannoni
0 siblings, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread
From: kewarken @ 2003-09-16 18:48 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gdb-patches
[-- Attachment #1: Type: TEXT/PLAIN, Size: 1065 bytes --]
This patch addresses an issue with SH processors where gdb cannot
backtrace out of function with more than 256 bytes of local variables.
Code such as:
sub1()
{
int buf[64];
}
sub2()
{
int buf[65];
}
generates prologues such as:
sub1:
mov.l r14,@-r15
add #-128,r15
add #-128,r15
mov r15,r14
.L8:
mov.w .L9,r7
add r7,r14
mov r14,r15
mov.l @r15+,r14
rts
nop
.align 1
.L9:
.short 256
and
sub2:
mov.l r14,@-r15
mov.w .L11,r3
sub r3,r15
mov r15,r14
.L10:
mov.w .L11,r7
add r7,r14
mov r14,r15
mov.l @r15+,r14
rts
nop
.align 1
.L11:
.short 260
The second form is not recognized properly by the frame code in gdb. In
the gcc 3 series, r1 is used instead of r3 so this patch expands on the
original patch attached to the PR.
Credit to inaba@src.ricoh.co.jp for his original find and patch and to
Colin Burgess for noting the differences between gcc 2 and 3.
ChangeLog:
2003-09-16 Kris Warkentin <kewarken@qnx.com>
* sh-tdep.c: Properly detect frame prologues for functions with
more than 256 bytes of local variables.
[-- Attachment #2: Type: TEXT/PLAIN, Size: 4116 bytes --]
Index: sh-tdep.c
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvs/src/src/gdb/sh-tdep.c,v
retrieving revision 1.136
diff -u -r1.136 sh-tdep.c
--- sh-tdep.c 21 Aug 2003 00:01:31 -0000 1.136
+++ sh-tdep.c 16 Sep 2003 18:35:39 -0000
@@ -622,13 +622,39 @@
r15+imm-->r15 */
#define IS_ADD_SP(x) (((x) & 0xff00) == 0x7f00)
-#define IS_MOV_R3(x) (((x) & 0xff00) == 0x1a00)
+/* MOV #imm,r3 11100011iiiiiiii
+ imm-->r3 */
+#define IS_MOV_R3(x) (((x) & 0xff00) == 0xe300)
#define IS_SHLL_R3(x) ((x) == 0x4300)
/* ADD r3,r15 0011111100111100
r15+r3-->r15 */
#define IS_ADD_R3SP(x) ((x) == 0x3f3c)
+/* MOV.W @(disp, pc), r1 10010001dddddddd
+ (disp * 2 + pc + 4)-->r1 */
+#define IS_MOVW_R1(x) (((x) & 0xff00) == 0x9100)
+
+/* MOV.L @(disp, pc), r1 11010001dddddddd
+ (disp * 4 + pc + 4)-->r1 */
+#define IS_MOVL_R1(x) (((x) & 0xff00) == 0xd100)
+
+/* SUB r1,r15 00111111100011000
+ r15-r1-->r15 */
+#define IS_SUB_R1SP(x) ((x) == 0x3f18)
+
+/* MOV.W @(disp, pc), r3 10010011dddddddd
+ (disp * 2 + pc + 4)-->r3 */
+#define IS_MOVW_R3(x) (((x) & 0xff00) == 0x9300)
+
+/* MOV.L @(disp, pc), r3 11010011dddddddd
+ (disp * 4 + pc + 4)-->r3 */
+#define IS_MOVL_R3(x) (((x) & 0xff00) == 0xd300)
+
+/* SUB r3,r15 00111111100111000
+ r15-r3-->r15 */
+#define IS_SUB_R3SP(x) ((x) == 0x3f38)
+
/* FMOV.S FRm,@-Rn Rn-4-->Rn, FRm-->(Rn) 1111nnnnmmmm1011
FMOV DRm,@-Rn Rn-8-->Rn, DRm-->(Rn) 1111nnnnmmm01011
FMOV XDm,@-Rn Rn-8-->Rn, XDm-->(Rn) 1111nnnnmmm11011 */
@@ -696,8 +722,11 @@
{
int w = read_memory_integer (here, 2);
here += 2;
- if (IS_FMOV (w) || IS_PUSH (w) || IS_STS (w) || IS_MOV_R3 (w)
- || IS_ADD_R3SP (w) || IS_ADD_SP (w) || IS_SHLL_R3 (w)
+ if (IS_FMOV (w) || IS_PUSH (w) || IS_STS (w)
+ || IS_MOV_R3 (w)
+ || IS_MOVW_R3 (w) || IS_MOVL_R3 (w) || IS_SUB_R3SP (w) || IS_ADD_R3SP (w)
+ || IS_MOVW_R1 (w) || IS_MOVL_R1 (w) || IS_SUB_R1SP (w)
+ || IS_ADD_SP (w) || IS_SHLL_R3 (w)
|| IS_ARG_MOV (w) || IS_MOV_TO_R14 (w))
{
start_pc = here;
@@ -1101,6 +1130,7 @@
int pc;
int opc;
int insn;
+ int r1_val = 0;
int r3_val = 0;
char *dummy_regs = deprecated_generic_find_dummy_frame (get_frame_pc (fi),
get_frame_base (fi));
@@ -1167,6 +1197,30 @@
{
depth += -r3_val;
}
+ else if (IS_MOVW_R1 (insn))
+ {
+ r1_val = read_memory_integer (pc + 4 + (insn & 0xff) * 2, 2);
+ }
+ else if (IS_MOVL_R1 (insn))
+ {
+ r1_val = read_memory_integer (pc + 4 + (insn & 0xff) * 4, 4);
+ }
+ else if (IS_SUB_R1SP (insn))
+ {
+ depth += r1_val;
+ }
+ else if (IS_MOVW_R3 (insn))
+ {
+ r3_val = read_memory_integer (pc + 4 + (insn & 0xff) * 2, 2);
+ }
+ else if (IS_MOVL_R3 (insn))
+ {
+ r3_val = read_memory_integer (pc + 4 + (insn & 0xff) * 4, 4);
+ }
+ else if (IS_SUB_R3SP (insn))
+ {
+ depth += r3_val;
+ }
else if (IS_ADD_SP (insn))
{
depth -= ((insn & 0xff) ^ 0x80) - 0x80;
@@ -1642,6 +1696,7 @@
int pc;
int opc;
int insn;
+ int r1_val = 0;
int r3_val = 0;
char *dummy_regs = deprecated_generic_find_dummy_frame (get_frame_pc (fi), get_frame_base (fi));
struct gdbarch_tdep *tdep = gdbarch_tdep (current_gdbarch);
@@ -1707,6 +1762,30 @@
else if (IS_ADD_R3SP (insn))
{
depth += -r3_val;
+ }
+ else if (IS_MOVW_R1 (insn))
+ {
+ r1_val = read_memory_integer (pc + 4 + (insn & 0xff) * 2, 2);
+ }
+ else if (IS_MOVL_R1 (insn))
+ {
+ r1_val = read_memory_integer (pc + 4 + (insn & 0xff) * 4, 4);
+ }
+ else if (IS_SUB_R1SP (insn))
+ {
+ depth += r1_val;
+ }
+ else if (IS_MOVW_R3 (insn))
+ {
+ r3_val = read_memory_integer (pc + 4 + (insn & 0xff) * 2, 2);
+ }
+ else if (IS_MOVL_R3 (insn))
+ {
+ r3_val = read_memory_integer (pc + 4 + (insn & 0xff) * 4, 4);
+ }
+ else if (IS_SUB_R3SP (insn))
+ {
+ depth += r3_val;
}
else if (IS_ADD_SP (insn))
{
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread* Re: [Patch] fix for PR:1291
2003-09-16 18:48 [Patch] fix for PR:1291 kewarken
@ 2003-09-23 21:03 ` Elena Zannoni
2003-09-24 1:20 ` Kris Warkentin
0 siblings, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread
From: Elena Zannoni @ 2003-09-23 21:03 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: kewarken; +Cc: gdb-patches
kewarken writes:
> This patch addresses an issue with SH processors where gdb cannot
> backtrace out of function with more than 256 bytes of local variables.
>
> Code such as:
>
> sub1()
> {
> int buf[64];
> }
>
> sub2()
> {
> int buf[65];
> }
>
> generates prologues such as:
>
> sub1:
> mov.l r14,@-r15
> add #-128,r15
> add #-128,r15
> mov r15,r14
> .L8:
> mov.w .L9,r7
> add r7,r14
> mov r14,r15
> mov.l @r15+,r14
> rts
> nop
> .align 1
> .L9:
> .short 256
>
> and
>
> sub2:
> mov.l r14,@-r15
> mov.w .L11,r3
> sub r3,r15
> mov r15,r14
> .L10:
> mov.w .L11,r7
> add r7,r14
> mov r14,r15
> mov.l @r15+,r14
> rts
> nop
> .align 1
> .L11:
> .short 260
>
>
> The second form is not recognized properly by the frame code in gdb. In
> the gcc 3 series, r1 is used instead of r3 so this patch expands on the
> original patch attached to the PR.
>
> Credit to inaba@src.ricoh.co.jp for his original find and patch and to
> Colin Burgess for noting the differences between gcc 2 and 3.
>
> ChangeLog:
>
> 2003-09-16 Kris Warkentin <kewarken@qnx.com>
>
> * sh-tdep.c: Properly detect frame prologues for functions with
> more than 256 bytes of local variables.
You should give credit to these folks in the changelog entry.
I wonder if this can be captured in a test case? How does your change
interacts with Corinna's rewrite?
elena
>Index: sh-tdep.c
> ===================================================================
> RCS file: /cvs/src/src/gdb/sh-tdep.c,v
> retrieving revision 1.136
> diff -u -r1.136 sh-tdep.c
> --- sh-tdep.c 21 Aug 2003 00:01:31 -0000 1.136
> +++ sh-tdep.c 16 Sep 2003 18:35:39 -0000
> @@ -622,13 +622,39 @@
> r15+imm-->r15 */
> #define IS_ADD_SP(x) (((x) & 0xff00) == 0x7f00)
>
> -#define IS_MOV_R3(x) (((x) & 0xff00) == 0x1a00)
> +/* MOV #imm,r3 11100011iiiiiiii
> + imm-->r3 */
> +#define IS_MOV_R3(x) (((x) & 0xff00) == 0xe300)
> #define IS_SHLL_R3(x) ((x) == 0x4300)
>
> /* ADD r3,r15 0011111100111100
> r15+r3-->r15 */
> #define IS_ADD_R3SP(x) ((x) == 0x3f3c)
>
> +/* MOV.W @(disp, pc), r1 10010001dddddddd
> + (disp * 2 + pc + 4)-->r1 */
> +#define IS_MOVW_R1(x) (((x) & 0xff00) == 0x9100)
> +
> +/* MOV.L @(disp, pc), r1 11010001dddddddd
> + (disp * 4 + pc + 4)-->r1 */
> +#define IS_MOVL_R1(x) (((x) & 0xff00) == 0xd100)
> +
> +/* SUB r1,r15 00111111100011000
> + r15-r1-->r15 */
> +#define IS_SUB_R1SP(x) ((x) == 0x3f18)
> +
> +/* MOV.W @(disp, pc), r3 10010011dddddddd
> + (disp * 2 + pc + 4)-->r3 */
> +#define IS_MOVW_R3(x) (((x) & 0xff00) == 0x9300)
> +
> +/* MOV.L @(disp, pc), r3 11010011dddddddd
> + (disp * 4 + pc + 4)-->r3 */
> +#define IS_MOVL_R3(x) (((x) & 0xff00) == 0xd300)
> +
> +/* SUB r3,r15 00111111100111000
> + r15-r3-->r15 */
> +#define IS_SUB_R3SP(x) ((x) == 0x3f38)
> +
> /* FMOV.S FRm,@-Rn Rn-4-->Rn, FRm-->(Rn) 1111nnnnmmmm1011
> FMOV DRm,@-Rn Rn-8-->Rn, DRm-->(Rn) 1111nnnnmmm01011
> FMOV XDm,@-Rn Rn-8-->Rn, XDm-->(Rn) 1111nnnnmmm11011 */
> @@ -696,8 +722,11 @@
> {
> int w = read_memory_integer (here, 2);
> here += 2;
> - if (IS_FMOV (w) || IS_PUSH (w) || IS_STS (w) || IS_MOV_R3 (w)
> - || IS_ADD_R3SP (w) || IS_ADD_SP (w) || IS_SHLL_R3 (w)
> + if (IS_FMOV (w) || IS_PUSH (w) || IS_STS (w)
> + || IS_MOV_R3 (w)
> + || IS_MOVW_R3 (w) || IS_MOVL_R3 (w) || IS_SUB_R3SP (w) || IS_ADD_R3SP (w)
> + || IS_MOVW_R1 (w) || IS_MOVL_R1 (w) || IS_SUB_R1SP (w)
> + || IS_ADD_SP (w) || IS_SHLL_R3 (w)
> || IS_ARG_MOV (w) || IS_MOV_TO_R14 (w))
> {
> start_pc = here;
> @@ -1101,6 +1130,7 @@
> int pc;
> int opc;
> int insn;
> + int r1_val = 0;
> int r3_val = 0;
> char *dummy_regs = deprecated_generic_find_dummy_frame (get_frame_pc (fi),
> get_frame_base (fi));
> @@ -1167,6 +1197,30 @@
> {
> depth += -r3_val;
> }
> + else if (IS_MOVW_R1 (insn))
> + {
> + r1_val = read_memory_integer (pc + 4 + (insn & 0xff) * 2, 2);
> + }
> + else if (IS_MOVL_R1 (insn))
> + {
> + r1_val = read_memory_integer (pc + 4 + (insn & 0xff) * 4, 4);
> + }
> + else if (IS_SUB_R1SP (insn))
> + {
> + depth += r1_val;
> + }
> + else if (IS_MOVW_R3 (insn))
> + {
> + r3_val = read_memory_integer (pc + 4 + (insn & 0xff) * 2, 2);
> + }
> + else if (IS_MOVL_R3 (insn))
> + {
> + r3_val = read_memory_integer (pc + 4 + (insn & 0xff) * 4, 4);
> + }
> + else if (IS_SUB_R3SP (insn))
> + {
> + depth += r3_val;
> + }
> else if (IS_ADD_SP (insn))
> {
> depth -= ((insn & 0xff) ^ 0x80) - 0x80;
> @@ -1642,6 +1696,7 @@
> int pc;
> int opc;
> int insn;
> + int r1_val = 0;
> int r3_val = 0;
> char *dummy_regs = deprecated_generic_find_dummy_frame (get_frame_pc (fi), get_frame_base (fi));
> struct gdbarch_tdep *tdep = gdbarch_tdep (current_gdbarch);
> @@ -1707,6 +1762,30 @@
> else if (IS_ADD_R3SP (insn))
> {
> depth += -r3_val;
> + }
> + else if (IS_MOVW_R1 (insn))
> + {
> + r1_val = read_memory_integer (pc + 4 + (insn & 0xff) * 2, 2);
> + }
> + else if (IS_MOVL_R1 (insn))
> + {
> + r1_val = read_memory_integer (pc + 4 + (insn & 0xff) * 4, 4);
> + }
> + else if (IS_SUB_R1SP (insn))
> + {
> + depth += r1_val;
> + }
> + else if (IS_MOVW_R3 (insn))
> + {
> + r3_val = read_memory_integer (pc + 4 + (insn & 0xff) * 2, 2);
> + }
> + else if (IS_MOVL_R3 (insn))
> + {
> + r3_val = read_memory_integer (pc + 4 + (insn & 0xff) * 4, 4);
> + }
> + else if (IS_SUB_R3SP (insn))
> + {
> + depth += r3_val;
> }
> else if (IS_ADD_SP (insn))
> {
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread* Re: [Patch] fix for PR:1291
2003-09-23 21:03 ` Elena Zannoni
@ 2003-09-24 1:20 ` Kris Warkentin
2003-10-16 18:46 ` [Patch] fix for PR:1291 (Ping Corinna) Kris Warkentin
0 siblings, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread
From: Kris Warkentin @ 2003-09-24 1:20 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Elena Zannoni; +Cc: gdb-patches
> kewarken writes:
> > Credit to inaba@src.ricoh.co.jp for his original find and patch and to
> > Colin Burgess for noting the differences between gcc 2 and 3.
> >
> > ChangeLog:
> >
> > 2003-09-16 Kris Warkentin <kewarken@qnx.com>
> >
> > * sh-tdep.c: Properly detect frame prologues for functions with
> > more than 256 bytes of local variables.
>
> You should give credit to these folks in the changelog entry.
Certainly.
> I wonder if this can be captured in a test case? How does your change
> interacts with Corinna's rewrite?
I'll take a look at it when I have some more time next week. The test case
is very simple so I can easily check to see if Corinna's stuff fixes it.
Unfortunately my available gdb cycles have been extremely low lately since
we have a lot of critical internal stuff that I've been grabbed for.
cheers,
Kris
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: [Patch] fix for PR:1291 (Ping Corinna)
2003-09-24 1:20 ` Kris Warkentin
@ 2003-10-16 18:46 ` Kris Warkentin
2003-10-24 13:16 ` Elena Zannoni
0 siblings, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread
From: Kris Warkentin @ 2003-10-16 18:46 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Elena Zannoni; +Cc: gdb-patches
Howdy all,
Finally got around to building a head branch gdb with Corinna's sh4 work.
Excellent job. The backtrace works perfectly now and renders my patch
redundant. Someone can probably put this PR to fixed-test.
cheers,
Kris
----- Original Message -----
From: "Kris Warkentin" <kewarken@qnx.com>
To: "Elena Zannoni" <ezannoni@redhat.com>
Cc: <gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com>
Sent: Tuesday, September 23, 2003 9:21 PM
Subject: Re: [Patch] fix for PR:1291
> > kewarken writes:
> > > Credit to inaba@src.ricoh.co.jp for his original find and patch and
to
> > > Colin Burgess for noting the differences between gcc 2 and 3.
> > >
> > > ChangeLog:
> > >
> > > 2003-09-16 Kris Warkentin <kewarken@qnx.com>
> > >
> > > * sh-tdep.c: Properly detect frame prologues for functions with
> > > more than 256 bytes of local variables.
> >
> > You should give credit to these folks in the changelog entry.
>
> Certainly.
>
> > I wonder if this can be captured in a test case? How does your change
> > interacts with Corinna's rewrite?
>
> I'll take a look at it when I have some more time next week. The test
case
> is very simple so I can easily check to see if Corinna's stuff fixes it.
> Unfortunately my available gdb cycles have been extremely low lately since
> we have a lot of critical internal stuff that I've been grabbed for.
>
> cheers,
>
> Kris
>
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: [Patch] fix for PR:1291 (Ping Corinna)
2003-10-16 18:46 ` [Patch] fix for PR:1291 (Ping Corinna) Kris Warkentin
@ 2003-10-24 13:16 ` Elena Zannoni
2003-10-24 14:27 ` Kris Warkentin
0 siblings, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread
From: Elena Zannoni @ 2003-10-24 13:16 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Kris Warkentin; +Cc: Elena Zannoni, gdb-patches
Kris Warkentin writes:
> Howdy all,
>
> Finally got around to building a head branch gdb with Corinna's sh4 work.
> Excellent job. The backtrace works perfectly now and renders my patch
> redundant. Someone can probably put this PR to fixed-test.
>
Could you still come up with a small testcase to be added to gdb.arch?
elena
> cheers,
>
> Kris
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Kris Warkentin" <kewarken@qnx.com>
> To: "Elena Zannoni" <ezannoni@redhat.com>
> Cc: <gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, September 23, 2003 9:21 PM
> Subject: Re: [Patch] fix for PR:1291
>
>
> > > kewarken writes:
> > > > Credit to inaba@src.ricoh.co.jp for his original find and patch and
> to
> > > > Colin Burgess for noting the differences between gcc 2 and 3.
> > > >
> > > > ChangeLog:
> > > >
> > > > 2003-09-16 Kris Warkentin <kewarken@qnx.com>
> > > >
> > > > * sh-tdep.c: Properly detect frame prologues for functions with
> > > > more than 256 bytes of local variables.
> > >
> > > You should give credit to these folks in the changelog entry.
> >
> > Certainly.
> >
> > > I wonder if this can be captured in a test case? How does your change
> > > interacts with Corinna's rewrite?
> >
> > I'll take a look at it when I have some more time next week. The test
> case
> > is very simple so I can easily check to see if Corinna's stuff fixes it.
> > Unfortunately my available gdb cycles have been extremely low lately since
> > we have a lot of critical internal stuff that I've been grabbed for.
> >
> > cheers,
> >
> > Kris
> >
> >
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: [Patch] fix for PR:1291 (Ping Corinna)
2003-10-24 13:16 ` Elena Zannoni
@ 2003-10-24 14:27 ` Kris Warkentin
2003-10-24 14:39 ` Elena Zannoni
0 siblings, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread
From: Kris Warkentin @ 2003-10-24 14:27 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Elena Zannoni; +Cc: Elena Zannoni, gdb-patches
Here is what I used. Do I need to do something to formally put this in or
is this sufficient?
cheers,
Kris
#include <stdio.h>
main()
{
printf("hello world\n");
sub1();
sub2();
}
sub1()
{
int buf[64];
}
sub2()
{
int buf[65];
}
break sub1
break sub2
run
backtrace
continue
backtrace
Failure:
Breakpoint 1, sub1 () at sh-bt.c:13
13 }
(gdb) bt
#0 sub1 () at sh-bt.c:13
#1 0x0804047c in main () at sh-bt.c:6
#2 0x08040432 in t2 ()
(gdb) c
Continuing.
Breakpoint 2, sub2 () at sh-bt.c:18
18 }
(gdb) bt
#0 sub2 () at sh-bt.c:18
(gdb)
Success:
Breakpoint 1, sub1 () at sh-bt.c:13
13 }
(gdb) bt
#0 sub1 () at sh-bt.c:13
#1 0x0804047c in main () at sh-bt.c:6
(gdb) c
Continuing.
Breakpoint 2, sub2 () at sh-bt.c:18
18 }
(gdb) bt
#0 sub2 () at sh-bt.c:18
#1 0x08040484 in main () at sh-bt.c:7
(gdb)
----- Original Message -----
From: "Elena Zannoni" <ezannoni@redhat.com>
To: "Kris Warkentin" <kewarken@qnx.com>
Cc: "Elena Zannoni" <ezannoni@redhat.com>; <gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com>
Sent: Friday, October 24, 2003 9:16 AM
Subject: Re: [Patch] fix for PR:1291 (Ping Corinna)
> Kris Warkentin writes:
> > Howdy all,
> >
> > Finally got around to building a head branch gdb with Corinna's sh4
work.
> > Excellent job. The backtrace works perfectly now and renders my patch
> > redundant. Someone can probably put this PR to fixed-test.
> >
>
> Could you still come up with a small testcase to be added to gdb.arch?
>
> elena
>
>
> > cheers,
> >
> > Kris
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Kris Warkentin" <kewarken@qnx.com>
> > To: "Elena Zannoni" <ezannoni@redhat.com>
> > Cc: <gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com>
> > Sent: Tuesday, September 23, 2003 9:21 PM
> > Subject: Re: [Patch] fix for PR:1291
> >
> >
> > > > kewarken writes:
> > > > > Credit to inaba@src.ricoh.co.jp for his original find and patch
and
> > to
> > > > > Colin Burgess for noting the differences between gcc 2 and 3.
> > > > >
> > > > > ChangeLog:
> > > > >
> > > > > 2003-09-16 Kris Warkentin <kewarken@qnx.com>
> > > > >
> > > > > * sh-tdep.c: Properly detect frame prologues for functions with
> > > > > more than 256 bytes of local variables.
> > > >
> > > > You should give credit to these folks in the changelog entry.
> > >
> > > Certainly.
> > >
> > > > I wonder if this can be captured in a test case? How does your
change
> > > > interacts with Corinna's rewrite?
> > >
> > > I'll take a look at it when I have some more time next week. The
test
> > case
> > > is very simple so I can easily check to see if Corinna's stuff fixes
it.
> > > Unfortunately my available gdb cycles have been extremely low lately
since
> > > we have a lot of critical internal stuff that I've been grabbed for.
> > >
> > > cheers,
> > >
> > > Kris
> > >
> > >
> >
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread* Re: [Patch] fix for PR:1291 (Ping Corinna)
2003-10-24 14:27 ` Kris Warkentin
@ 2003-10-24 14:39 ` Elena Zannoni
0 siblings, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: Elena Zannoni @ 2003-10-24 14:39 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Kris Warkentin; +Cc: Elena Zannoni, gdb-patches
Kris Warkentin writes:
> Here is what I used. Do I need to do something to formally put this in or
> is this sufficient?
Unfortunally no, you should try to write a 1291.exp file as well.
elena
>
> cheers,
>
> Kris
>
> #include <stdio.h>
>
> main()
> {
> printf("hello world\n");
> sub1();
> sub2();
> }
>
> sub1()
> {
> int buf[64];
> }
>
> sub2()
> {
> int buf[65];
> }
>
>
> break sub1
> break sub2
> run
> backtrace
> continue
> backtrace
>
> Failure:
> Breakpoint 1, sub1 () at sh-bt.c:13
> 13 }
> (gdb) bt
> #0 sub1 () at sh-bt.c:13
> #1 0x0804047c in main () at sh-bt.c:6
> #2 0x08040432 in t2 ()
> (gdb) c
> Continuing.
>
> Breakpoint 2, sub2 () at sh-bt.c:18
> 18 }
> (gdb) bt
> #0 sub2 () at sh-bt.c:18
> (gdb)
>
> Success:
> Breakpoint 1, sub1 () at sh-bt.c:13
> 13 }
> (gdb) bt
> #0 sub1 () at sh-bt.c:13
> #1 0x0804047c in main () at sh-bt.c:6
> (gdb) c
> Continuing.
>
> Breakpoint 2, sub2 () at sh-bt.c:18
> 18 }
> (gdb) bt
> #0 sub2 () at sh-bt.c:18
> #1 0x08040484 in main () at sh-bt.c:7
> (gdb)
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Elena Zannoni" <ezannoni@redhat.com>
> To: "Kris Warkentin" <kewarken@qnx.com>
> Cc: "Elena Zannoni" <ezannoni@redhat.com>; <gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com>
> Sent: Friday, October 24, 2003 9:16 AM
> Subject: Re: [Patch] fix for PR:1291 (Ping Corinna)
>
>
> > Kris Warkentin writes:
> > > Howdy all,
> > >
> > > Finally got around to building a head branch gdb with Corinna's sh4
> work.
> > > Excellent job. The backtrace works perfectly now and renders my patch
> > > redundant. Someone can probably put this PR to fixed-test.
> > >
> >
> > Could you still come up with a small testcase to be added to gdb.arch?
> >
> > elena
> >
> >
> > > cheers,
> > >
> > > Kris
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: "Kris Warkentin" <kewarken@qnx.com>
> > > To: "Elena Zannoni" <ezannoni@redhat.com>
> > > Cc: <gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com>
> > > Sent: Tuesday, September 23, 2003 9:21 PM
> > > Subject: Re: [Patch] fix for PR:1291
> > >
> > >
> > > > > kewarken writes:
> > > > > > Credit to inaba@src.ricoh.co.jp for his original find and patch
> and
> > > to
> > > > > > Colin Burgess for noting the differences between gcc 2 and 3.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > ChangeLog:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 2003-09-16 Kris Warkentin <kewarken@qnx.com>
> > > > > >
> > > > > > * sh-tdep.c: Properly detect frame prologues for functions with
> > > > > > more than 256 bytes of local variables.
> > > > >
> > > > > You should give credit to these folks in the changelog entry.
> > > >
> > > > Certainly.
> > > >
> > > > > I wonder if this can be captured in a test case? How does your
> change
> > > > > interacts with Corinna's rewrite?
> > > >
> > > > I'll take a look at it when I have some more time next week. The
> test
> > > case
> > > > is very simple so I can easily check to see if Corinna's stuff fixes
> it.
> > > > Unfortunately my available gdb cycles have been extremely low lately
> since
> > > > we have a lot of critical internal stuff that I've been grabbed for.
> > > >
> > > > cheers,
> > > >
> > > > Kris
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: [Patch] fix for PR:1291
@ 2003-09-23 21:25 Michael Elizabeth Chastain
0 siblings, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: Michael Elizabeth Chastain @ 2003-09-23 21:25 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: ezannoni, kewarken; +Cc: gdb-patches
eza> I wonder if this can be captured in a test case?
Yes, see testsuite/gdb.arch/i386-prologue.exp for a prologue
test case by Mark Kettenis.
The idea is to write explicit assembly code and then check
gdb's behavior on it. That avoids the compiler dependency.
Michael C
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2003-10-24 14:39 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2003-09-16 18:48 [Patch] fix for PR:1291 kewarken
2003-09-23 21:03 ` Elena Zannoni
2003-09-24 1:20 ` Kris Warkentin
2003-10-16 18:46 ` [Patch] fix for PR:1291 (Ping Corinna) Kris Warkentin
2003-10-24 13:16 ` Elena Zannoni
2003-10-24 14:27 ` Kris Warkentin
2003-10-24 14:39 ` Elena Zannoni
2003-09-23 21:25 [Patch] fix for PR:1291 Michael Elizabeth Chastain
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox