From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 13101 invoked by alias); 18 Oct 2006 14:18:21 -0000 Received: (qmail 13084 invoked by uid 22791); 18 Oct 2006 14:18:20 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from nevyn.them.org (HELO nevyn.them.org) (66.93.172.17) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31.1) with ESMTP; Wed, 18 Oct 2006 14:18:12 +0000 Received: from drow by nevyn.them.org with local (Exim 4.54) id 1GaCFA-00025t-PX; Wed, 18 Oct 2006 10:18:04 -0400 Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2006 14:18:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: Wu Zhou Cc: Mark Kettenis , gdb-patches@sourceware.org, brobecker@adacore.com Subject: Re: Improve end check on rs6000 prologue analyzer Message-ID: <20061018141804.GB7771@nevyn.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: Wu Zhou , Mark Kettenis , gdb-patches@sourceware.org, brobecker@adacore.com References: <20060929213726.GA1770@nevyn.them.org> <200609301932.k8UJW0kw030997@elgar.sibelius.xs4all.nl> <20061017212114.GC12643@nevyn.them.org> <4535BE8B.8000003@cn.ibm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4535BE8B.8000003@cn.ibm.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11) X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2006-10/txt/msg00215.txt.bz2 On Wed, Oct 18, 2006 at 01:41:31PM +0800, Wu Zhou wrote: > It seems that powerpc-linux is skipped as a whole: > > if {[istarget *-*-aix*] || ![istarget "powerpc-*-*"]} then { > verbose "Skipping PowerPC prologue tests." > return > } > > What about open this for powerpc-linux? I commented the above code and > have a test in both 32-bit and 64-bit mode on a ppc64 box. For 32-bit > mode, there are six more PASS. And for 64-bit mode, we have still 1 PASS > and 9 FAIL. Why not just keep these FAIL there, to remind us that these > are places we need to improve? Just my two cents anyway. :-) Thanks for catching this. It's a bug in the patch: I was testing in 32-bit mode on a powerpc64 system, so I removed the "64" from that skip, but I forgot to put it back! It should be skipping powerpc64-*-*; the test won't work there because the asm isn't 64-bit safe. > I have yet another proposal to incorporate the bl_to_blrl patch, which is > discussed in http://sources.redhat.com/ml/gdb/2006-10/msg00085.html, into > this one. Both are improvement for rs6000 prologue analyzer. They're not related patches. We'll deal with them separately. I just haven't had a chance to look at it yet, nor has anyone else, I suppose. -- Daniel Jacobowitz CodeSourcery