From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 28317 invoked by alias); 7 Jan 2004 22:29:10 -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 28297 invoked from network); 7 Jan 2004 22:29:08 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO bubble.modra.org) (144.136.188.60) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 7 Jan 2004 22:29:08 -0000 Received: by bubble.modra.org (Postfix, from userid 500) id 41AA3892A3; Thu, 8 Jan 2004 08:59:07 +1030 (CST) Date: Wed, 07 Jan 2004 22:29:00 -0000 From: Alan Modra To: Mark Kettenis Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org, geoffk@desire.geoffk.org, cagney@gnu.org, dje@watson.ibm.com, gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com, Ulrich.Weigand@de.ibm.com Subject: Re: Incorrect DWARF-2 register numbers on PPC64? Message-ID: <20040107222907.GO2533@bubble.modra.org> Mail-Followup-To: Mark Kettenis , gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org, geoffk@desire.geoffk.org, cagney@gnu.org, dje@watson.ibm.com, gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com, Ulrich.Weigand@de.ibm.com References: <200312182258.hBIMwgT25422@makai.watson.ibm.com> <200312201527.hBKFRHgI000712@elgar.kettenis.dyndns.org> <3FF5A069.1040306@gnu.org> <200401022317.i02NHQBR001191@desire.geoffk.org> <20040106152710.GB2533@bubble.modra.org> <200401071743.i07HhAle000811@elgar.kettenis.dyndns.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200401071743.i07HhAle000811@elgar.kettenis.dyndns.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i X-SW-Source: 2004-01/txt/msg00178.txt.bz2 On Wed, Jan 07, 2004 at 06:43:10PM +0100, Mark Kettenis wrote: > If I read your patch correctly, this fixes normal DWARF 2 debugging > info to use the official System V register numbers, but lets GCC > continue to use its own numbering for the Call Frame Info (CFI) in > both the .eh_frame and .debug_frame sections. That's correct. hppa, hppa64, iq2000 and ns32k all do the same. mips and cris also define DWARF_FRAME_REGNUM, but squinting at the code leads me to believe they will actually use the same register numbers. > This won't work for GDB > since it assumes that CFI uses the same register number encoding as > all the other DWARF 2 debug information. Hmm, I can see that a debugger might reasonably expect .debug_frame to have the same numbers. When I wrote the patch, I was concentrating on .eh_frame rather than .debug_frame, but .debug_frame uses the .eh_frame numbering. It's a little perplexing that dwarf2out.c does this, as it means defining DWARF_FRAME_REGNUM to something other than DBX_REGISTER_NUMBER is useless. DWARF_FRAME_REGNUM ought to just effect .eh_frame. I'm not keen on trying to untangle dwarf2out.c though.. -- Alan Modra IBM OzLabs - Linux Technology Centre