From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 9248 invoked by alias); 24 Feb 2003 04:17:57 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 9240 invoked from network); 24 Feb 2003 04:17:56 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO crack.them.org) (65.125.64.184) by 172.16.49.205 with SMTP; 24 Feb 2003 04:17:56 -0000 Received: from nevyn.them.org ([66.93.61.169] ident=mail) by crack.them.org with asmtp (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian)) id 18nBx5-0004Hm-00; Mon, 24 Feb 2003 00:18:59 -0600 Received: from drow by nevyn.them.org with local (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian)) id 18nA3p-0005Eb-00; Sun, 23 Feb 2003 23:17:49 -0500 Date: Mon, 24 Feb 2003 04:17:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: Michael Elizabeth Chastain Cc: fnasser@redhat.com, gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [rfa] new test, pr-1090.exp, multi-register variables Message-ID: <20030224041749.GB20002@nevyn.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: Michael Elizabeth Chastain , fnasser@redhat.com, gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com References: <200302240355.h1O3ti606453@duracef.shout.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200302240355.h1O3ti606453@duracef.shout.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.1i X-SW-Source: 2003-02/txt/msg00569.txt.bz2 On Sun, Feb 23, 2003 at 09:55:44PM -0600, Michael Elizabeth Chastain wrote: > This is a new test script for pr gdb/1090, which is about register > variables which occupy several registers. Both gdb 5.3 and gdb > HEAD%20030223 get this wrong. In my testbed, this happens with > gcc 2.95.3; gcc v3 compilers don't allocate multi-register variables. > > The symptom of this bug is that gdb prints the first word of a > structure correctly but botches the second word. The test has a nice > KFAIL for this. > > Okay to commit? You may want to see gdb/214. Mark posted a proposal for solving it to gdb@ some weeks ago and it never went further; I don't remember what the verdict was. Some day very soon we'll have GDB support to describe this explicitly; some day after that GCC will output the appropriate debug info (DW_OP_piece). May be a little while. -- Daniel Jacobowitz MontaVista Software Debian GNU/Linux Developer