From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gdb-patches-return-37309-listarch-gdb-patches=sources.redhat.com@sources.redhat.com>
Received: (qmail 30392 invoked by alias); 6 Dec 2004 03:03:23 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gdb-patches-subscribe@sources.redhat.com>
List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/gdb-patches/>
List-Post: <mailto:gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com>
List-Help: <mailto:gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sources.redhat.com
Received: (qmail 30373 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2004 03:03:17 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO nevyn.them.org) (66.93.172.17)
  by sourceware.org with SMTP; 6 Dec 2004 03:03:17 -0000
Received: from drow by nevyn.them.org with local (Exim 4.34 #1 (Debian))
	id 1Cb99d-00087M-D4; Sun, 05 Dec 2004 22:03:13 -0500
Date: Mon, 06 Dec 2004 03:06:00 -0000
From: Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@false.org>
To: Randolph Chung <randolph@tausq.org>
Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
Subject: Re: [patch/rfa] tweak patterns for annota3.exp
Message-ID: <20041206030313.GA31167@nevyn.them.org>
Mail-Followup-To: Randolph Chung <randolph@tausq.org>,
	gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
References: <20041206021944.GX6359@tausq.org> <20041206024904.GA30704@nevyn.them.org> <20041206025645.GY6359@tausq.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20041206025645.GY6359@tausq.org>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.5.1+cvs20040105i
X-SW-Source: 2004-12/txt/msg00144.txt.bz2

On Sun, Dec 05, 2004 at 06:56:45PM -0800, Randolph Chung wrote:
> > 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... 

You could put a breakpoint on vfprintf_unfiltered to find out :-)

> 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?

There should be an _additional_ .loc before the ldo.  The rule for what
GDB expects is: one line note before the function, one after the
prologue.

-- 
Daniel Jacobowitz