Re: [RFA] New GDB target iq2000

[Corinna Vinschen <vinschen@redhat.com>]

On Mar  4 09:14, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 04, 2005 at 10:46:05AM +0100, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> > I'm sorry, but the reason for getting rid of linetable-aware code is
> > somewhat beyond me.
> 
> Because _there is nothing architecture specific about what you are
> doing_.  Therefore, most likely, it is either right for all platforms
> or wrong for this one.  I want to understand which.  If it's right for
> all platforms, I'd like it to live in common code so that we can
> maintain it for all platforms.

The platform specific part is to call iq2000_scan_prologue if the
line number information is bogus.

> >  I'll happily do something else, as far as it's
> > available and works, but using skip_prologue_using_sal is really no
> > option here.
> 
> Why?  Is it the same problem Kevin described?  As I wrote, I have
> successfully used this function on other architectures.

I haven't exactly analyzed the situation so far, but using
skip_prologue_using_sal results in three more FAILs in the testsuite:

  FAIL: gdb.base/break.exp: breakpoint small function, optimized file
  FAIL: gdb.base/break.exp: run until breakpoint set at small function, optimized file
  FAIL: gdb.base/nodebug.exp: running to inner in runto

All three cases don't look like simple coincidence.  In all three cases
we suffer from either optimized code or unavailable debug information.
The target specific "knowledge", which is represented by the call to
iq2000_scan_prologue helps to master this situation.


Corinna

-- 
Corinna Vinschen
Cygwin Project Co-Leader
Red Hat, Inc.