Mirror of the gdb-patches mailing list
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Richard Earnshaw <rearnsha@arm.com>
To: Michael Snyder <msnyder@redhat.com>
Cc: fnf@redhat.com, gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com, Richard.Earnshaw@arm.com
Subject: Re: [RFC] "info registers" is misleading
Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2002 04:09:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <200201221027.KAA28112@cam-mail2.cambridge.arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Mon, 21 Jan 2002 23:08:36 PST." <3C4D0FF4.57D1@redhat.com>


msnyder@redhat.com said:
> This is an old old issue.  The frame pointer register is special.
> Info registers does not show the actual value of the fp register -- it
> shows the virtual frame pointer (the address of the function's stack
> frame).  Usually it's the same value -- unles you're in a frameless
> function (ie. one that does not use the frame pointer register).

> Now that we have pseudo-registers, we've talked about  adding a
> pseudo-frame-pointer register and using it for FP_REGNUM, so that the
> "real" frame pointer register can always display its real value. 

Indeed.  It isn't even confined to Thumb code.  If you have ARM code 
compiled with -fomit-frame-pointer, then gdb will confuse the 
stack-pointer and frame-pointer registers.  Very hard to work out what is 
happening, especially if you want to force a register.

If we add extra gloop to "info registers" for printing out the 
pseudo-frame-pointer register, then please don't call it "fp" (or at least 
allow a target to provide its own name): "fp" is a well-known alias on the 
arm (defined by the APCS) for r11.  Users should be able to use fp as the 
ARM register r11 and will get confused if it represents anything else.

R.


  parent reply	other threads:[~2002-01-22 12:09 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2002-01-21 22:51 Fred Fish
2002-01-21 23:13 ` Michael Snyder
2002-01-22  2:46   ` Eli Zaretskii
2002-01-22  5:47     ` Richard Earnshaw
2002-01-22  7:23     ` Andrew Cagney
2002-01-22  4:09   ` Richard Earnshaw [this message]
2002-01-22  7:49     ` Michael Snyder
2002-01-22  7:21 ` Andrew Cagney
2002-01-22  7:44 Michael Elizabeth Chastain

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=200201221027.KAA28112@cam-mail2.cambridge.arm.com \
    --to=rearnsha@arm.com \
    --cc=Richard.Earnshaw@arm.com \
    --cc=fnf@redhat.com \
    --cc=gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com \
    --cc=msnyder@redhat.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