From: Richard Earnshaw <rearnsha@arm.com>
To: Jerome Guitton <guitton@act-europe.fr>
Cc: Richard.Earnshaw@arm.com, gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
Subject: Re: [RFA] ARM : prologue scan
Date: Tue, 09 Sep 2003 12:49:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <200309091249.h89Cnsn25311@pc960.cambridge.arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Tue, 09 Sep 2003 12:23:15 +0200." <20030909102315.GQ26104@act-europe.fr>
> Richard Earnshaw (rearnsha@arm.com):
>
> > > 2003-07-21 J. Guitton <guitton@gnat.com>
> > >
> > > * arm-tdep.c (arm_skip_prologue): Add the handling of "sub ip, sp #n"
> > > and "add ip, sp #n", as these instructions can be found in a ATPCS
> > > compliant prologue.
> > > (arm_scan_prologue): Ditto.
> >
> > Secondly, and this applies only to the ChangeLog entry itself, this entry
> > sequence is nothing to do with the ATPCS (the A*T*PCS doesn't even
> > sanction the use of a frame pointer).
>
> You are right. I got confused by these comments:
>
> The APCS (ARM Procedure Call Standard) defines the following
> prologue:
>
> mov ip, sp
> [stmfd sp!, {a1,a2,a3,a4}]
> stmfd sp!, {...,fp,ip,lr,pc}
> [stfe f7, [sp, #-12]!]
> [stfe f6, [sp, #-12]!]
> [stfe f5, [sp, #-12]!]
> [stfe f4, [sp, #-12]!]
> sub fp, ip, #nn @@ nn == 20 or 4 depending on second insn */
>
> I didn't see this definition in the ARM Thumb Procedure Call Standard...
> Is the ARM Procedure Call Standard a different document? If so, what is
> its status (Does the ATPCS make the APCS obsolete?) and where can I find
> it?
>
The APCS is obsolete (it predates Thumb), you might find some documents on
the web if you look hard enough, but I wouldn't bet on it these days.
Nevertheless, it's what ARM/Linux is currently based upon, so its usage is
not.
ARM/Linux substantially uses the minor variant APCS-R, but updated for use
on 32-bit mode.
R.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2003-09-09 12:49 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2003-07-21 14:27 Jerome Guitton
2003-07-21 14:31 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2003-07-21 14:38 ` Jerome Guitton
2003-07-21 14:57 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2003-07-21 15:20 ` Jerome Guitton
2003-07-21 15:28 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2003-07-21 15:43 ` Jerome Guitton
2003-07-22 9:48 ` Jerome Guitton
2003-07-22 11:47 ` Jerome Guitton
2003-09-01 15:45 ` Ping: " Jerome Guitton
2003-09-05 10:14 ` Richard Earnshaw
2003-09-05 15:56 ` Joel Brobecker
2003-09-05 16:03 ` Richard Earnshaw
2003-09-09 10:23 ` Jerome Guitton
2003-09-09 12:49 ` Richard Earnshaw [this message]
2003-09-09 12:52 ` Jerome Guitton
2003-09-23 19:03 ` Jerome Guitton
2003-09-25 14:24 ` [commit] " Jerome Guitton
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=200309091249.h89Cnsn25311@pc960.cambridge.arm.com \
--to=rearnsha@arm.com \
--cc=Richard.Earnshaw@arm.com \
--cc=gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com \
--cc=guitton@act-europe.fr \
/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