From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 18237 invoked by alias); 8 May 2012 20:43:18 -0000 Received: (qmail 18229 invoked by uid 22791); 8 May 2012 20:43:17 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_NO X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from rock.gnat.com (HELO rock.gnat.com) (205.232.38.15) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Tue, 08 May 2012 20:43:05 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by filtered-rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7E5941C62EC; Tue, 8 May 2012 16:43:04 -0400 (EDT) Received: from rock.gnat.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (rock.gnat.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id g-Gn4cs3YLPA; Tue, 8 May 2012 16:43:04 -0400 (EDT) Received: from joel.gnat.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4C3AB1C62EA; Tue, 8 May 2012 16:43:04 -0400 (EDT) Received: by joel.gnat.com (Postfix, from userid 1000) id EECCA145616; Tue, 8 May 2012 13:42:57 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 08 May 2012 20:43:00 -0000 From: Joel Brobecker To: "Maciej W. Rozycki" Cc: Mark Kettenis , gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [RFA 1/2] mips: Switch inferior function calls to ON_STACK method. Message-ID: <20120508204257.GC15555@adacore.com> References: <20120503214933.GJ15555@adacore.com> <20120504205818.GT15555@adacore.com> <201205042118.q44LIh3p018153@glazunov.sibelius.xs4all.nl> <201205051144.q45Bitv4006357@glazunov.sibelius.xs4all.nl> <20120508160542.GB15555@adacore.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) 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: 2012-05/txt/msg00242.txt.bz2 > You set bp_addr to SP here, so you rely on the stack pointer to have > been implicitly adjusted down below the current frame [...] I was actually confused, as I thought that SP pointed to the first unused slot in the stack. I will make the changes that you suggest and re-test. One thing that just occured to me while driving home is why not also use the AT_ENTRY_POINT approach. I figured that there must have been a reason why we used AT_SYMBOL instead of AT_ENTRY_POINT. But then, there is your comment that makes me think that the symbol isn't usually defined, which means that most of (all?) the time, we actually end up using AT_ENTRY_POINT. Do we know of any reason why AT_ENTRY_POINT would not work? I'd assume that as long as the object format is ELF, we'd have one, and so we could use that as well. Geee, are we ever going to reach a conclusion on this discussion? :-/ -- Joel