From: Mark Kettenis <mark.kettenis@xs4all.nl>
To: fnf@specifix.com
Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com, fnf@specifix.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix PPC scan_prologue for code generated with -mno-update
Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2007 08:22:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <200702160822.l1G8MYL8026770@brahms.sibelius.xs4all.nl> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200702151807.06227.fnf@specifix.com> (message from Fred Fish on Thu, 15 Feb 2007 18:07:06 -0700)
> From: Fred Fish <fnf@specifix.com>
> Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2007 18:07:06 -0700
>
> If the PPC gcc is used with the -mno-update option, it generates a
> prologue instruction to allocate cache that gdb does not recognize.
> Gdb disassembles it as "addi r1,r1,NUM".
>
> If you run the gdb testsuite for powerpc-eabi and add -mno-update to
> the list of compilation options, you get a huge increase in failures,
> most due to problems doing backtraces. Without using -mno-update
> you get:
>
> # of expected passes 36024
> # of unexpected failures 756
>
> With -mno-update you get:
>
> # of expected passes 33220
> # of unexpected failures 3928
>
> After applying the attached patch, the results with -mno-update
> become:
>
> # of expected passes 36028
> # of unexpected failures 752
>
> This also fixes an existing failure (1 for each multilib):
>
> 4448c4446
> < FAIL: gdb.base/recurse.exp: next over b = 0 in second instance
> ---
> > PASS: gdb.base/recurse.exp: next over b = 0 in second instance
>
> I didn't examine why that failure was fixed by the patch.
Looks reasonable to me. However there's one thing I don't understand.
Presuming you're using DWARF2 debug info, why does improving the
prologue scanner make such a big difference?
Mark
next parent reply other threads:[~2007-02-16 8:22 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <200702151807.06227.fnf@specifix.com>
2007-02-16 8:22 ` Mark Kettenis [this message]
2007-02-16 12:00 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2007-02-16 14:01 ` Fred Fish
2007-02-16 16:47 ` Fred Fish
2007-02-27 17:11 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2007-02-27 17:31 ` Fred Fish
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=200702160822.l1G8MYL8026770@brahms.sibelius.xs4all.nl \
--to=mark.kettenis@xs4all.nl \
--cc=fnf@specifix.com \
--cc=gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox