From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 25334 invoked by alias); 27 Apr 2007 21:48:39 -0000 Received: (qmail 25322 invoked by uid 22791); 27 Apr 2007 21:48:38 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from return.false.org (HELO return.false.org) (66.207.162.98) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Fri, 27 Apr 2007 22:48:34 +0100 Received: from return.false.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by return.false.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B29374B267; Fri, 27 Apr 2007 16:48:31 -0500 (CDT) Received: from caradoc.them.org (dsl093-172-095.pit1.dsl.speakeasy.net [66.93.172.95]) by return.false.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 790AE4B262; Fri, 27 Apr 2007 16:48:31 -0500 (CDT) Received: from drow by caradoc.them.org with local (Exim 4.67) (envelope-from ) id 1HhYIo-0005ws-5E; Fri, 27 Apr 2007 17:48:30 -0400 Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2007 22:16:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: Kevin Buettner Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [RFC] dwarf2_read_address(): sign extend as appropriate Message-ID: <20070427214829.GA21596@caradoc.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: Kevin Buettner , gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com References: <20070420163312.56701614@ironwood.lan> <200704231505.l3NF5KV5025451@d12av02.megacenter.de.ibm.com> <20070423094900.15a047d2@ironwood.lan> <20070423165646.GA15110@caradoc.them.org> <20070423140642.3920579e@ironwood.lan> <20070424181308.GA26543@caradoc.them.org> <20070427141018.1430725b@ironwood.lan> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20070427141018.1430725b@ironwood.lan> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.15 (2007-04-09) 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: 2007-04/txt/msg00364.txt.bz2 On Fri, Apr 27, 2007 at 02:10:18PM -0700, Kevin Buettner wrote: > I decided to give the `value_as_address' approach a try. It worked > as expected when I tried running it against a MIPS target. > > Comments? > > * dwarf2expr.c (unsigned_address_type): Add forward declaration. > (dwarf2_read_address): Sign extend return address as required by > target architecture. Fine with me, although I would request you not to put code in the comments; we can figure it out again later, and I find commented out code too confusing. Do you happen to have more MIPS patches lying around? I'm in the middle of enabling CFI, based on some old patches of yours; I encountered yet another new address sign / size confusion. -- Daniel Jacobowitz CodeSourcery