From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 17573 invoked by alias); 4 Mar 2005 15:01:52 -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 17531 invoked from network); 4 Mar 2005 15:01:46 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (66.187.233.31) by sourceware.org with SMTP; 4 Mar 2005 15:01:46 -0000 Received: from int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (int-mx1.corp.redhat.com [172.16.52.254]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id j24F1k65001732 for ; Fri, 4 Mar 2005 10:01:46 -0500 Received: from potter.sfbay.redhat.com (potter.sfbay.redhat.com [172.16.27.15]) by int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id j24F1eK10985 for ; Fri, 4 Mar 2005 10:01:41 -0500 Received: from cygbert.vinschen.de (vpn50-12.rdu.redhat.com [172.16.50.12]) by potter.sfbay.redhat.com (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id j24F1b5s026388 for ; Fri, 4 Mar 2005 10:01:39 -0500 Received: by cygbert.vinschen.de (Postfix, from userid 500) id 0321457D6E; Fri, 4 Mar 2005 16:01:29 +0100 (CET) Date: Fri, 04 Mar 2005 15:01:00 -0000 From: Corinna Vinschen To: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [RFA] New GDB target iq2000 Message-ID: <20050304150129.GF2839@cygbert.vinschen.de> Reply-To: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Mail-Followup-To: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com References: <20050222114141.GA18314@cygbert.vinschen.de> <20050303173443.GD18681@nevyn.them.org> <20050304094605.GU2839@cygbert.vinschen.de> <20050304141439.GA30249@nevyn.them.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20050304141439.GA30249@nevyn.them.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2i X-SW-Source: 2005-03/txt/msg00043.txt.bz2 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.