From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 9003 invoked by alias); 30 Jun 2008 08:39:11 -0000 Received: (qmail 8976 invoked by uid 22791); 30 Jun 2008 08:39:09 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from miranda.se.axis.com (HELO miranda.se.axis.com) (193.13.178.8) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Mon, 30 Jun 2008 08:38:52 +0000 Received: from ignucius.se.axis.com (ignucius.se.axis.com [10.84.50.18]) by miranda.se.axis.com (8.13.4/8.13.4/Debian-3sarge3) with ESMTP id m5U8cjFM029380; Mon, 30 Jun 2008 10:38:45 +0200 Received: from ignucius.se.axis.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ignucius.se.axis.com (8.12.8p1/8.12.8/Debian-2woody1) with ESMTP id m5U8cjEv005159; Mon, 30 Jun 2008 10:38:45 +0200 Received: (from hp@localhost) by ignucius.se.axis.com (8.12.8p1/8.12.8/Debian-2woody1) id m5U8ciPp005155; Mon, 30 Jun 2008 10:38:44 +0200 Date: Mon, 30 Jun 2008 14:00:00 -0000 Message-Id: <200806300838.m5U8ciPp005155@ignucius.se.axis.com> From: Hans-Peter Nilsson To: drow@false.org CC: gdb-patches@sourceware.org, orjan.friberg@axis.com, hans-peter.nilsson@axis.com, ricard.wanderlof@axis.com In-reply-to: <20080629024031.GA26670@caradoc.them.org> (message from Daniel Jacobowitz on Sat, 28 Jun 2008 22:40:31 -0400) Subject: Re: [rfc] Delay slots on cris MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT 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: 2008-06/txt/msg00585.txt.bz2 > Date: Sat, 28 Jun 2008 22:40:31 -0400 > From: Daniel Jacobowitz > I've been auditing all uses of the frame unwind methods and this one > seems wrong. If I understand correctly, ERP/NRP have the low bit set > when the program was interrupted in the midst of a delay slot. Right. > While > ERP is rarely saved - so by default frame_unwind_register and > get_frame_register will find the same value - I believe the copy we > want is the current frame's (i.e. the one whose current PC is pointing > at the branch). Right? That certainly sounds reasonable, but I think better Orjan chime in here. > [The cris target has no listed maintainers and has had no > non-mechanical changes in just over three years. Knowing the likely > culprits, CC'd, I assume that means it works fine :-)] So I've heard; I haven't tested it myself. I'm listed under "Authorized Committers" as CRIS Hans-Peter Nilsson hp@axis.com (I just fixed the email address address). Apparently someone pruned me from the target-maintainer section, but that's fine. I guess we can and should find someone to put there; I'll look into it. brgds, H-P