Re: [RFA/RFC] dwarf2-frame read_reg

[Mark Kettenis <mark.kettenis@xs4all.nl>]

> X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.0 (2005-09-13) on 
> 	elgar.sibelius.xs4all.nl
> X-Spam-Level: 
> X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=failed 
> 	version=3.1.0
> Date: Thu, 20 Apr 2006 13:21:12 -0400
> From: Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@false.org>
> Cc: jimb@red-bean.com, msnyder@redhat.com, gdb-patches@sourceware.org
> Mail-Followup-To: Mark Kettenis <mark.kettenis@xs4all.nl>, 	jimb@red-bean.com, msnyder@redhat.com, gdb-patches@sourceware.org
> Content-Disposition: inline
> X-IsSubscribed: yes
> Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm
> Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org
> X-UTwente-MailScanner-Information: Scanned by MailScanner. Contact helpdesk@ITBE.utwente.nl for more information.
> X-UTwente-MailScanner: Found to be clean
> X-MailScanner-From: gdb-patches-return-43755-m.m.kettenis=alumnus.utwente.nl@sourceware.org
> X-XS4ALL-DNSBL-Checked: mxdrop5.xs4all.nl checked 192.87.17.19 against DNS blacklists
> X-Virus-Scanned: by XS4ALL Virus Scanner
> X-XS4ALL-Spam-Score: 0 () 
> X-XS4ALL-Spam: NO
> Envelope-To: mark.kettenis@xs4all.nl
> X-UIDL: 1145553701._smtp.mxdrop5.43414,S=4323
> 
> On Wed, Apr 12, 2006 at 08:17:07PM +0200, Mark Kettenis wrote:
> > > Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2006 21:42:01 -0700
> > > From: "Jim Blandy" <jimb@red-bean.com>
> > > 
> > > On 4/11/06, Michael Snyder <msnyder@redhat.com> wrote:
> > > > I want you guys to vett this change.  I was getting wrong results
> > > > on a target where sizeof (SP) != sizeof (void *).  The local func
> > > > read_reg was calling extract_unsigned_integer with the wrong size.
> > > 
> > > Well, extract_typed_address requires the type of the register to be
> > > some sort of pointer.  read_reg is given as a callback to the Dwarf
> > > expression evaluator in dwarf2expr.c, so it could be handed any
> > > register at all.
> > > 
> > > How about unpack_long (buf, register_type (gdbarch, regnum))? 
> > > Definitely regression-test this on several platforms...
> > 
> > This is likely to be wrong for platforms where addresses are signed.
> 
> It shouldn't be.

Ok, cool.  Objection withdrawn.

Mark