From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 21649 invoked by alias); 19 May 2003 17:15:14 -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 21590 invoked from network); 19 May 2003 17:15:13 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO walton.kettenis.dyndns.org) (62.163.169.212) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 19 May 2003 17:15:13 -0000 Received: from elgar.kettenis.dyndns.org (elgar.kettenis.dyndns.org [192.168.0.2]) by walton.kettenis.dyndns.org (8.12.6p2/8.12.5) with ESMTP id h4JHFCNo000296; Mon, 19 May 2003 19:15:12 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from kettenis@elgar.kettenis.dyndns.org) Received: from elgar.kettenis.dyndns.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by elgar.kettenis.dyndns.org (8.12.6p2/8.12.6) with ESMTP id h4JHFCh7001223; Mon, 19 May 2003 19:15:12 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from kettenis@elgar.kettenis.dyndns.org) Received: (from kettenis@localhost) by elgar.kettenis.dyndns.org (8.12.6p2/8.12.6/Submit) id h4JHFCei001220; Mon, 19 May 2003 19:15:12 +0200 (CEST) Date: Mon, 19 May 2003 17:15:00 -0000 Message-Id: <200305191715.h4JHFCei001220@elgar.kettenis.dyndns.org> From: Mark Kettenis To: aj@suse.de CC: mludvig@suse.cz, gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com In-reply-to: (message from Andreas Jaeger on Mon, 19 May 2003 09:09:33 +0200) Subject: Re: [PATCH/i386newframe] amd64newframe References: <200305172226.h4HMQ8nJ010688@elgar.kettenis.dyndns.org> <3EC8810F.3040905@suse.cz> X-SW-Source: 2003-05/txt/msg00342.txt.bz2 Cc: Mark Kettenis , gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com From: Andreas Jaeger Date: Mon, 19 May 2003 09:09:33 +0200 User-Agent: Gnus/5.1003 (Gnus v5.10.3) XEmacs/21.4 (Portable Code, linux) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Michal Ludvig writes: > Mark Kettenis told me that: >> (gdb) warning: Unmapped DWARF Register #16 encountered >> 6 return 0; >> (gdb) warning: Unmapped DWARF Register #16 encountered >> 7 } >> Ah, that must be the new DWARF CFI frame unwinder. The return >> address >> RA isn't mapped. I could change the DWARF register mapping in >> x86-64-tdep.c, but this really is a problem with the DWARF CFI frame >> unwinder since the compiler is free to choose any number it wants for >> the return address column. Should be fixed now. > > IMHO compiler shouldn't choose whatever it wants - RA column is > defined in the Amd64 ABI (sec.3.6). Ah, but the DWARF specification allows the compiler to choose the number of the RA column. Even if the amd64 ABI says the RA is in column 16, there might be other platforms where the column number changes from frame to frame. The current code is more correct than the old code regardless of what we choose to do on amd64. > Anyway thanks for moving amd64 target to the new unwinder! Yes, thanks! Michal, can you help testing, please? Yes, that would be great. As soon as it performs better than the old stuff, I'd like to move things over to mainline. Mark