From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 12820 invoked by alias); 29 Oct 2003 22:43:04 -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 12806 invoked from network); 29 Oct 2003 22:43:01 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mx01.netapp.com) (198.95.226.53) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 29 Oct 2003 22:43:01 -0000 Received: from frejya.corp.netapp.com (frejya [10.10.20.91]) by mx01.netapp.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/NTAP-1.4) with ESMTP id h9TMgs4Z025502; Wed, 29 Oct 2003 14:42:54 -0800 (PST) Received: from bughouse.hq.netapp.com (bughouse.hq.netapp.com [10.34.24.48]) by frejya.corp.netapp.com (8.12.9/8.12.9/NTAP-1.5) with ESMTP id h9TMgrvj027745; Wed, 29 Oct 2003 14:42:53 -0800 (PST) Received: from bughouse.hq.netapp.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by bughouse.hq.netapp.com (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id h9TMgrkr007166; Wed, 29 Oct 2003 14:42:53 -0800 Received: (from nomura@localhost) by bughouse.hq.netapp.com (8.12.8/8.12.7/Submit) id h9TMgqLp007164; Wed, 29 Oct 2003 14:42:52 -0800 Date: Wed, 29 Oct 2003 22:43:00 -0000 From: Kevin Nomura To: Andrew Cagney , Kevin Nomura , gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: inconsistent sigtramp code in mips target Message-ID: <20031029224252.GO4286@bughouse.netapp.com> References: <20031028215814.GY4320@bughouse.netapp.com> <3FA03EDC.2090407@redhat.com> <20031029222957.GA12468@nevyn.them.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20031029222957.GA12468@nevyn.them.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i X-SW-Source: 2003-10/txt/msg00850.txt.bz2 On Wed, Oct 29, 2003 at 05:30:01PM -0500, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote: > On Wed, Oct 29, 2003 at 05:27:40PM -0500, Andrew Cagney wrote: > > >The logical patch would be to move the special cases up front, > > >but I have no way to test this out (no access to a MIPS UNIX > > >platform). > > > > > >On the other hand this isn't purely academic. I came across this > > >because I need to define a custom sigtramp frame for our own > > >MIPS embedded platform. It was baffling for a while that my > > >modification to the SP_REGNUM override had no effect. > > > > Rather than the MIPS, check the x86 family for how to add a custom > > sigtramp handler (ex, i386_sigtramp_frame_sniffer). Hopefully the new > > mechanism is less baffling - the current MIPS code is not a good reference. > > But since he's got a MIPS target, the frame sniffers won't help him at > all, will they? They can't be used until the MIPS is converted. Right. I used the new framework for i386, and am puzzling it out for Alpha. MIPS is a horse of a different colour and required breaking encapsulation entirely by hacking frame.c:deprecated_update_frame_base_hack() in addition to the above.