From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gdb-patches-return-56460-listarch-gdb-patches=sources.redhat.com@sourceware.org>
Received: (qmail 4241 invoked by alias); 5 Jun 2008 20:44:46 -0000
Received: (qmail 4233 invoked by uid 22791); 5 Jun 2008 20:44:46 -0000
X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Received: from sibelius.xs4all.nl (HELO sibelius.xs4all.nl) (82.92.89.47)     by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Thu, 05 Jun 2008 20:44:28 +0000
Received: from brahms.sibelius.xs4all.nl (kettenis@localhost.sibelius.xs4all.nl [127.0.0.1]) 	by brahms.sibelius.xs4all.nl (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id m55KfnNi014549; 	Thu, 5 Jun 2008 22:41:49 +0200 (CEST)
Received: (from kettenis@localhost) 	by brahms.sibelius.xs4all.nl (8.14.3/8.14.3/Submit) id m55Kfneh015684; 	Thu, 5 Jun 2008 22:41:49 +0200 (CEST)
Date: Thu, 05 Jun 2008 20:44:00 -0000
Message-Id: <200806052041.m55Kfneh015684@brahms.sibelius.xs4all.nl>
From: Mark Kettenis <mark.kettenis@xs4all.nl>
To: drow@false.org
CC: muller@ics.u-strasbg.fr, pedro@codesourcery.com,         gdb-patches@sourceware.org
In-reply-to: <20080605202640.GL25085@caradoc.them.org> (message from Daniel 	Jacobowitz on Thu, 5 Jun 2008 16:26:40 -0400)
Subject: Re: [PING2] : [RFC/RFA] PING: skip __main
References: <004f01c8ac58$06a1ddb0$13e59910$@u-strasbg.fr> <000c01c8c246$de300f50$9a902df0$@u-strasbg.fr> <200805301157.m4UBvOL5009408@brahms.sibelius.xs4all.nl> <001901c8c256$06f8be00$14ea3a00$@u-strasbg.fr> <001a01c8c263$f493b1d0$ddbb1570$@u-strasbg.fr> <200805301457.m4UEvnGD028393@brahms.sibelius.xs4all.nl> <000301c8c2ea$0c2d72a0$248857e0$@u-strasbg.fr> <20080605202640.GL25085@caradoc.them.org>
Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gdb-patches.sourceware.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gdb-patches-subscribe@sourceware.org>
List-Archive: <http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/>
List-Post: <mailto:gdb-patches@sourceware.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org
X-SW-Source: 2008-06/txt/msg00074.txt.bz2

> Date: Thu, 5 Jun 2008 16:26:40 -0400
> From: Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@false.org>
> 
> On Sat, May 31, 2008 at 08:46:25AM +0200, Pierre Muller wrote:
> >   Should I use the 32bit typecast strategy:
> > 
> > unsigned int32 pc_after = pc + 5; 
> > unsigned int32 depl = extract_unsigned_integer (buf, 4);
> >    
> > unsigned int32 dest = pc_after - depl;
> > pc = dest;
> > 
> > I don't know the checks done in C,
> > are there any overflow checks in code like this,
> > or is it safe to assume that it will work,
> > even on machine that perform their operations
> > on more than 32 bits?
> 
> If you use uint32_t, then you are guaranteed wrapping at 32 bits.
> So that is probably the best thing to do.  See the patch I just posted
> to make stdint.h available everywhere.

The diff should use extract_signed_integer().

I'm not sure if the wrapping is actually necessary.  Does the
assembler/linker actually depend on it?  Or does it error out on such
large jumps?  If so, alternatively you could explicity truncate the
generated address to 32 bits using & 0xffffffffU.