From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 31841 invoked by alias); 13 Jan 2007 16:40:38 -0000 Received: (qmail 31827 invoked by uid 22791); 13 Jan 2007 16:40:37 -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; Sat, 13 Jan 2007 16:40:32 +0000 Received: from drow by nevyn.them.org with local (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1H5lvg-0007j5-78; Sat, 13 Jan 2007 11:40:28 -0500 Date: Sat, 13 Jan 2007 16:40:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: Mark Kettenis Cc: jan.kratochvil@redhat.com, gdb-patches@sourceware.org, schwab@suse.de, brobecker@adacore.com Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix PPC non-CFI + CFI unwinding (incomplete in HEAD) Message-ID: <20070113164028.GA29436@nevyn.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: Mark Kettenis , jan.kratochvil@redhat.com, gdb-patches@sourceware.org, schwab@suse.de, brobecker@adacore.com References: <20070113093052.GA27383@host0.dyn.jankratochvil.net> <20070113160420.GB28179@nevyn.them.org> <200701131631.l0DGVW3W029896@brahms.sibelius.xs4all.nl> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200701131631.l0DGVW3W029896@brahms.sibelius.xs4all.nl> 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-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2007-01/txt/msg00335.txt.bz2 On Sat, Jan 13, 2007 at 05:31:32PM +0100, Mark Kettenis wrote: > > Date: Sat, 13 Jan 2007 11:04:20 -0500 > > From: Daniel Jacobowitz > > > > On Sat, Jan 13, 2007 at 10:30:52AM +0100, Jan Kratochvil wrote: > > > 2007-01-01 Jan Kratochvil > > > > > > * rs6000-tdep.c (skip_prologue): Handle bl->brlr used by PIC code. > > > > IIRC Joel was working on a patch for this case too. I'd been hoping one of > > our PPC experts would look at it... > > I've completely lost track of the various powerpc prologue scanner > fixes floating around. Is this patch supposed to fix the same problem > as the test below exposes? No, I don't think so - it's about the blrl at the front of the GOT in PIC code. I was thinking of this: http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2004-12/msg00249.html http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2005-06/msg00242.html I think someone needs to combine Joel's and Jan's patches. Joel's is nicer in that it uses branch_dest and the right mask for blrl; Jan's is nicer in that it checks whether lr was saved or is now lost. > + " stwu %r1,-32(%r1)\n" > + " lis %r9,-16342\n" > + " lis %r11,-16342\n" > + " mflr %r0\n" > + " addi %r11,%r11,3776\n" > + " stmw %r27,12(%r1)\n" > + " addi %r31,%r9,3152\n" > + " cmplw %cr7,%r31,%r11\n" > + " stw %r0,36(%r1)\n" > + " mr %r30,%r3\n" > + " bl optimized_1_marker\n" > + " lwz %r0,36(%r1)\n" > + " lmw %r27,12(%r1)\n" > + " addi %r1,%r1,32\n" > " blr"); Looks like a different problem to me :-( By the way, Mark, did you see this message? http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2006-10/msg00233.html I'd still like to fix that problem one way or another. If you haven't got time to look at it, I was considering setting up a virtual machine for the appropriate version of OpenBSD - it would be fearsomely slow, but I'm sure it would work. -- Daniel Jacobowitz CodeSourcery