Re: Improve end check on rs6000 prologue analyzer

Daniel Jacobowitz
2006-10-18T14:18:21Z

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.