From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 18838 invoked by alias); 31 Jul 2003 16:39:52 -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 18822 invoked from network); 31 Jul 2003 16:39:51 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO rwcrmhc12.comcast.net) (216.148.227.85) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 31 Jul 2003 16:39:51 -0000 Received: from lucon.org ([12.234.88.5]) by comcast.net (rwcrmhc12) with ESMTP id <2003073116395001400cm1abe>; Thu, 31 Jul 2003 16:39:50 +0000 Received: by lucon.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 1D3042C4EB; Thu, 31 Jul 2003 16:39:50 +0000 (UTC) Date: Thu, 31 Jul 2003 16:39:00 -0000 From: "H. J. Lu" To: GDB Subject: Re: PATCH: Fix DW_OP_deref for DW_TAG_formal_parameter Message-ID: <20030731163950.GA12667@lucon.org> References: <20030730215421.GA26408@lucon.org> <20030730215612.GB15640@nevyn.them.org> <20030731002306.GA28960@lucon.org> <20030731002753.GA18866@nevyn.them.org> <20030731154405.GA11592@lucon.org> <20030731154821.GA10106@nevyn.them.org> <20030731161259.GA11965@lucon.org> <20030731162207.GA24040@nevyn.them.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20030731162207.GA24040@nevyn.them.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i X-SW-Source: 2003-07/txt/msg00557.txt.bz2 On Thu, Jul 31, 2003 at 12:22:07PM -0400, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote: > On Thu, Jul 31, 2003 at 09:12:59AM -0700, H. J. Lu wrote: > > On Thu, Jul 31, 2003 at 11:48:21AM -0400, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote: > > > On Thu, Jul 31, 2003 at 08:44:05AM -0700, H. J. Lu wrote: > > > > On Wed, Jul 30, 2003 at 08:27:53PM -0400, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote: > > > > > On Wed, Jul 30, 2003 at 05:23:06PM -0700, H. J. Lu wrote: > > > > > > On Wed, Jul 30, 2003 at 05:56:12PM -0400, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote: > > > > > > > On Wed, Jul 30, 2003 at 02:54:21PM -0700, H. J. Lu wrote: > > > > > > > > Does DW_OP_deref work correctly with gdb? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > That depends on the context. Things that use decode_locdesc, probably > > > > > > > not. As we find time, things are being converted to the full > > > > > > > expression evaluator. Location descriptions and frame bases should > > > > > > > work. > > > > > > > > > > > > I don't think it does. Intel Fortran compiler generartes DW_OP_deref. > > > > > > I got > > > > > > > > > > Location descriptions for parameters may not work fully. Feel free to > > > > > fix it, or to investigate the reasons why more thoroughly - search for > > > > > LOC_COMPUTED_ARG, but I don't even think we generate those yet. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Please look more closely at what I suggested, and at how DW_OP_deref > > > works for DW_TAG_variable (as opposed to DW_TAG_formal_parameter). All > > > of the above should be turned into LOC_COMPUTED_ARG. > > > > > > > Thanks. This patch works for me. > > Could you test this alternative? The goal is to eliminate calls to > decode_locdesc. > Yes, it works. Thanks. H.J.