From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 19688 invoked by alias); 19 Apr 2004 13:22:06 -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 19677 invoked from network); 19 Apr 2004 13:22:06 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO nevyn.them.org) (66.93.172.17) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 19 Apr 2004 13:22:06 -0000 Received: from drow by nevyn.them.org with local (Exim 4.32 #1 (Debian)) id 1BFYiq-0003a4-Si; Mon, 19 Apr 2004 09:22:04 -0400 Date: Mon, 19 Apr 2004 13:22:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: Jim Blandy Cc: Joel Brobecker , gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [RFA] Fix small problems in rs6000-tdep.c:skip_prologue() Message-ID: <20040419132204.GC13666@nevyn.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: Jim Blandy , Joel Brobecker , gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com References: <20040402183637.GC871@gnat.com> <20040417051545.GO22414@gnat.com> <20040417143940.GA7428@nevyn.them.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.5.1+cvs20040105i X-SW-Source: 2004-04/txt/msg00423.txt.bz2 On Mon, Apr 19, 2004 at 01:11:56AM -0500, Jim Blandy wrote: > > Daniel Jacobowitz writes: > > On Fri, Apr 16, 2004 at 10:15:45PM -0700, Joel Brobecker wrote: > > > > In this case, the stX 0,N(31) is spilling an argument, even though r0 > > > > is not an argument register. ('evstdd' is an E500 instruction that > > > > is definitely an argument spill.) > > > > > > Dough! > > > > > > > Clearly, both your function and mine need to go into the test suite... > > > > > > I can add a new testcase in Ada for the prologue we saw. > > > > I'd prefer that you add them to gdb.asm, unless it's likely to produce > > strange prologues on other architectures. That way you can test what > > you're trying to test, instead of something different. For instance, > > once dwarf2 unwinding is switched on for PPC, an Ada testcase is likely > > to not trigger most of the prologue scanning. > > I totally agree. Prologue analysis failures are a major part of > stabilizing a GDB port, at least for me. I've never actually dumped > the exact prologues I've got on hand into a test script, but it seems > like the obvious thing to do. Is there some reason we don't already? We do now :) There's a collection of SH prologues, at least. -- Daniel Jacobowitz MontaVista Software Debian GNU/Linux Developer