From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 27878 invoked by alias); 7 Mar 2005 21:35:37 -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 27857 invoked from network); 7 Mar 2005 21:35:34 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO nevyn.them.org) (66.93.172.17) by sourceware.org with SMTP; 7 Mar 2005 21:35:34 -0000 Received: from drow by nevyn.them.org with local (Exim 4.44 #1 (Debian)) id 1D8Pt0-0007RL-6Y for ; Mon, 07 Mar 2005 16:35:34 -0500 Date: Mon, 07 Mar 2005 21:35:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [RFA] New GDB target iq2000 Message-ID: <20050307213534.GB28207@nevyn.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com References: <20050222114141.GA18314@cygbert.vinschen.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20050222114141.GA18314@cygbert.vinschen.de> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.6+20040907i X-SW-Source: 2005-03/txt/msg00101.txt.bz2 On Tue, Feb 22, 2005 at 12:41:41PM +0100, Corinna Vinschen wrote: > Hi, > > this posting contributes the iq2000 code for GDB. > > There's just one problem with it. Older GCC code (older than two days, > actually), emits an asymmetrical register numbering in the dwarf2 debugging > output. The iq2000 uses register 31 as link register, which contains the > return address to the calling function. For some reason GCC emitted the > register number 26 in the dwarf2 information for this register. Every > other register has been used unchanged in dwarf2, so there was no > unambiguous translation from dwarf2 register numbers to real register > numbers, if the dwarf2 register was "26". This has been fixed yesterday > in GCC HEAD. > > As a result, the dwarf2 frame sniffer has a problem with code generated > by GCC's older than two days. This is no problem for the iq2000 frame > sniffer implemented in iq2000-tdep.c, but as usual, the iq2000 frame > sniffer is appended after the dwarf2 frame sniffer: > > frame_unwind_append_sniffer (gdbarch, dwarf2_frame_sniffer); > frame_unwind_append_sniffer (gdbarch, iq2000_frame_sniffer); > > Would that be a good reason to disable the dwarf2 frame sniffer for now? > Or shall I leave that as is? This is OK; I'll handle the linetable issues separately. -- Daniel Jacobowitz CodeSourcery, LLC