From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 25897 invoked by alias); 6 Dec 2004 02:56:54 -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 25849 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2004 02:56:48 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO arwen.tausq.org) (64.81.244.109) by sourceware.org with SMTP; 6 Dec 2004 02:56:48 -0000 Received: by arwen.tausq.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id B5C86111F48; Sun, 5 Dec 2004 18:56:45 -0800 (PST) Date: Mon, 06 Dec 2004 03:03:00 -0000 From: Randolph Chung To: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [patch/rfa] tweak patterns for annota3.exp Message-ID: <20041206025645.GY6359@tausq.org> Reply-To: Randolph Chung References: <20041206021944.GX6359@tausq.org> <20041206024904.GA30704@nevyn.them.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20041206024904.GA30704@nevyn.them.org> X-GPG: for GPG key, see http://www.tausq.org/gpg.txt User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.6+20040722i X-SW-Source: 2004-12/txt/msg00143.txt.bz2 > Are you sure there's nothing but an extra \r\n? It definitely passes > for others, so I'd like to know where that came from. yup... the log says: signal SIGUSR1^M ^M ^Z^Zpost-prompt^M Continuing with signal SIGUSR1.^M ^M ^Z^Zstarting^M ^M ^Z^Zframes-invalid^M ^M ^Z^Zbreakpoint 2^M ^M Breakpoint 2, 0x000105d4 in handle_USR1 (sig=16) at /home/tausq/gdb/gdb-cvs/gdb/testsuite/gdb.base/annota3.c:18^M ^M ^Z^Zsource /home/tausq/gdb/gdb-cvs/gdb/testsuite/gdb.base/annota3.c:18:238:beg:0x105d4^M ^M ^Z^Zstopped^M ^M ^Z^Zpre-prompt^M (gdb) ^M ^Z^Zprompt^M PASS: gdb.base/annota3.exp: send SIGUSR1 i have no idea where that comes from either... > > address of the signal handler... i.e. i get > > > > #0 0x000105d4 in handle_USR1 (sig=16) at /home/tausq/gdb/gdb-cvs/gdb/testsuite/gdb.base/annota3.c:18 > > > > instead of what the script expected, which seems to be > > #0 handle_USR1 (sig=16) at /home/tausq/gdb/gdb-cvs/gdb/testsuite/gdb.base/annota3.c:18 > > The extra address means we didn't put the breakpoint at the beginning > of a line. This could be a prologue skipper bug, a GCC bug, a general > the-world-hates-us bug, or we could decide it wasn't a bug. The > testsuite seems to contain examples of all of the above. mmmmm. gcc creates this: .globl handle_USR1 .type handle_USR1, @function .LFB3: .loc 1 18 0 handle_USR1: .PROC .CALLINFO FRAME=64,NO_CALLS,SAVE_SP,ENTRY_GR=3 .ENTRY copy %r3,%r1 .LCFI0: copy %r30,%r3 .LCFI1: stwm %r1,64(%r30) .LCFI2: stw %r26,-36(%r3) ldo 64(%r3),%r30 ldwm -64(%r30),%r3 bv,n %r0(%r2) .EXIT .PROCEND we are breakpointing at the ldo insn, which seems to be correct from the prologue analysis point of view. do you mean that the ".loc" should be right before the ldo? randolph -- Randolph Chung Debian GNU/Linux Developer, hppa/ia64 ports http://www.tausq.org/