From: Andrew Cagney <ac131313@redhat.com>
To: Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@mvista.com>
Cc: Mark Kettenis <kettenis@chello.nl>,
colins@google.com, gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
Subject: Re: patch for printing 64-bit values in i386 registers; STABS format
Date: Mon, 28 Apr 2003 19:26:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <3EAD58B8.2070003@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20030428161443.GA30324@nevyn.them.org>
> - stabs would have to be modified (if we did this fixup in each and
> every debug reader, instead of in read_var_value and friends; I see
> good arguments both ways)
It would hopefully be a shared function that those debug readers could
call. The important thing is that the core code only knows about one
mechanism.
>> >This is one of the intended purposes of this mechanism, and as I
>
>> >>indicated, is needed by MIPS. Being able to project an arbitrary [debug
>> >>info] view of the registers onto the raw register buffer.
>> >>
>> >>BTW, what happens when there is an attempt to write a long long value?
>> >>GDB again assumes that it can write to contigious registers - the reason
>> >>why REGISTER_BYTE can't be killed.
>
>> >
>> >
>> >That ugliness could go away too with Mark's introduced method. GDB
>> >could be fixed to find the next register properly.
>
>>
>> GDB also uses it to encode offsets into a register. It also does not
>> help the MIPS where the debug register does need to be projected into
>> the raw registers. Why have add more mechanisms when the existing one
>> is sufficient. Focus the effort on fixing the real problem.
>>
>> BTW, my comment about no names was wrong. They can be named, that
>> restriction should have been removed by the introduction of reggroups.
>
>
> Well, in that case I guess it would work. Let's do it?
>
> It still feels much more like a hack to me than Mark's approach; I'll
> just quietly disagree I suppose.
Hmm, I think it will be needed anyway, what happens when the user is
debugging an i386 mode function (with 32 bit register based long long
debug info) on an x86-64 target? That's the MIPS problem, and it needs
that projection(1).
Also, the next_regnum method assumes that all debug infos use the same
register sequencing.
A word of caution though, the projection, at the register level works.
Frame's might need tweaking. The alternative is to start out with
deprecated_next_regnum so that it is clear where this stands.
Andrew
(1) dwarf2 debug info makes certain assumptions about the size of registers
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2003-04-28 16:37 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 30+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2003-04-25 0:27 Colin Smith
2003-04-25 2:07 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2003-04-25 22:18 ` Mark Kettenis
2003-04-25 22:24 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2003-04-26 3:05 ` Andrew Cagney
2003-04-26 3:20 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2003-04-26 3:32 ` Andrew Cagney
2003-04-26 3:39 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2003-04-26 8:25 ` Andrew Cagney
2003-04-27 3:47 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2003-04-28 15:22 ` Mark Kettenis
2003-04-28 16:09 ` Andrew Cagney
2003-04-28 16:14 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2003-04-28 16:15 ` Andrew Cagney
2003-04-28 16:37 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2003-04-28 19:26 ` Andrew Cagney [this message]
2003-04-28 22:47 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2003-04-29 2:15 ` re-ordered i386 regcache Andrew Cagney
2003-04-29 4:45 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2003-04-29 14:30 ` Andrew Cagney
2003-04-29 15:08 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2003-04-29 15:25 ` Andrew Cagney
2003-04-30 3:37 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2003-04-30 14:28 ` Andrew Cagney
2003-04-30 18:20 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2003-04-28 20:06 ` Re: patch for printing 64-bit values in i386 registers; STABS format Colin Smith
2003-04-28 0:51 ` Mark Kettenis
2003-04-28 16:18 ` Andrew Cagney
2003-04-28 17:30 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2003-04-25 0:29 Colin Smith
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=3EAD58B8.2070003@redhat.com \
--to=ac131313@redhat.com \
--cc=colins@google.com \
--cc=drow@mvista.com \
--cc=gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com \
--cc=kettenis@chello.nl \
/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