From: Andrew Cagney <ac131313@cygnus.com>
To: "David S. Miller" <davem@redhat.com>
Cc: mec@shout.net, fnasser@redhat.com, cagney@cygnus.com,
gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix xfail Sparc pattern
Date: Thu, 18 Apr 2002 15:29:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <3CBF48C9.30201@cygnus.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20020418.145531.68100471.davem@redhat.com>
David, note the e-mail below:
> AFAIK, generic dummy frames work only with the AT_ENTRY mechanism.
>
> But for 32 bit SPARC ABI we need ON_STACK, see
> http://sourceware.cygnus.com/ml/gdb/1999-q4/msg00064.html
> http://sources.redhat.com/ml/gdb-patches/2000-05/msg00041.html
> for an explanation.
>
> I am afraid that we have to extend the generic dummy frame code to allow
> ON_STACK, if we want to use generic dummy frames for SPARC.
>
>
>> Hello,
>>
>> If I remember one of those unwritten ``grand plans'' correctly, the
>> intent is to have all targets switched to ``generic dummy frames''. True?
>>
>> Among other things, generic dummy frames do not save/restore registers
>> on the target stack (instead they are cached locally) and this should
>> improve the overall performance of an inferior function call.
>>
>> Anyway, the thing that prompts this is PC_IN_CALL_DUMMY(PC, SP, FP).
>> There are several implementations. Only two:
>>
>> - generic: looks for the FP in the list of dummy frames
>> - stack: looks for PC in [FP..SP)
>>
>> require the SP/FP parameters. I've a patch to fix the first one (search
>> for the PC). If the ARM, SPARC and i386 can switch to generic dummy
>> frames then those parameters can be eliminated and all calls simplified.
>>
>> Any chance of having these converted?
>>
>> Andrew
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2002-04-18 22:29 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2002-04-18 9:06 Michael Elizabeth Chastain
2002-04-18 9:21 ` Andrew Cagney
2002-04-18 15:04 ` David S. Miller
2002-04-18 15:29 ` Andrew Cagney [this message]
2002-04-18 15:37 ` David S. Miller
2002-04-18 16:25 ` Andrew Cagney
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2002-04-17 12:57 David S. Miller
2002-04-18 7:48 ` Fernando Nasser
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=3CBF48C9.30201@cygnus.com \
--to=ac131313@cygnus.com \
--cc=cagney@cygnus.com \
--cc=davem@redhat.com \
--cc=fnasser@redhat.com \
--cc=gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com \
--cc=mec@shout.net \
/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