Re: PATCH RFA: Fix MI stack frame output for synthetic frames

[Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@mvista.com>]

On Wed, Feb 05, 2003 at 12:24:16AM -0800, Jason Molenda wrote:
> gcc 3.2 is outputting debug info like this -
> 
>         .stabs  "subroutine:F(9,7)",36,0,0,subroutine
>         .stabs  "in:p(0,1)",160,0,0,8
> .globl subroutine
>         .type   subroutine,@function
> subroutine:
>         .stabn 68,0,48,.LM18-subroutine
> .LM18:
>         pushl   %ebp
>         movl    %esp, %ebp
>         nop
>         .stabn 68,0,49,.LM19-subroutine    ; line #49 is the while (...)
> .LM19:
> .L6:
>         cmpl    $99, 8(%ebp)
>         jle     .L8
>         jmp     .L5
> .L8:
> 
> The compiler is correct to put the line stab there (it does the
> equivalent for DWARF2), and gdb is correct in putting the breakpoint
> on the cmpl insn, but the unfortunate end result of these two is that
> a user putting a breakpoint on the subroutine will have a breakpoint
> that's tripped each iteration of the loop.
> 
> Given all that, I'll check in a change to mi-syn-frames.c so this
> function reads
> 
> void
> subroutine (int in)
> {
>   int count = in;
>   while (count < 100)
>     count++;
> }
> 
> The assignment gives us two assembly instructions after the end of the
> prologue for a breakpoint that won't be hit at each iteration.  It's
> stupid, I know.
> 
> I'll make that change and run it through the testsuites tomorrow
> night.  If I get approval for the change before then (hint hint :)
> I'll check it in, else I'll post a patch.

Pre-approved as an obvious fix to the test.  Thanks for following up. 
I think there are a few other failures; I'll check again after you've
fixed this one.

-- 
Daniel Jacobowitz
MontaVista Software                         Debian GNU/Linux Developer