From: Andrew Cagney <ac131313@redhat.com>
To: Jim Blandy <jimb@redhat.com>
Cc: Kevin Buettner <kevinb@redhat.com>, gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
Subject: Re: [ppc64-linux] gdbarch hook to find true execution entry point
Date: Tue, 01 Jul 2003 22:53:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <3F0210EA.8050009@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <vt2isqn2n7k.fsf@zenia.home>
> - Can infcall.c instead explicitly call CONVERT_FROM_FUNC_PTR_ADDR on
>> CALL_DUMMY_ADDRESS, or better, have entry_point_address do this? It
>> would help eliminate CALL_DUMMY_ADDRESS.
>
>
> I'm not sure I understand enough of the details to say anything about
> this. Why isn't infcall.c just using entry_point_address right now?
Unfortunatly, a number of targets, such as PowerPC 64 GNU/Linux, have
added custom CALL_DUMMY_ADDRESS methods :-(
My original concern here was that CALL_DUMMY_ADDRESS,
CONVERT_FROM_FUNC_PTR_ADDR, and this new architecture method all
appeared to be doing roughly the same thing.
Can at PowerPC 64 GNU/Linux's CALL_DUMMY_ADDRESS be eliminated?
> So, given a function descriptor at VMA bfd_get_start_address(), there
>> are two possible code addresses:
>>
>> - The relocated address found by reading the descriptor from the target.
>> This is CONVERT_FROM_FUNC_PTR_ADDR (bfd_get_start_address(), target memory)?
>>
>> - The un-relocated address found by reading the descriptor from the bfd.
>> This is CONVERT_FROM_FUNC_PTR_ADDR (bfd_get_start_address(), use bfd
>> memory)?
>>
>> and the two values are different. Hence the new method.
>
>
> That's the important difference, yes. The trick the solib code uses
> to find the dynamic linker's load offset really does need the
> unrelocated address --- the amount by which it would need to be
> relocated is exactly what we're computing there.
So technically, CONVERT_FROM_FUNC_PTR_ADDR should be modified to take a
memory accessor method (bfd or the target). That would require a major
target stack overhaul though, outch :-(
This leaves either GDB or BFD needing this method. I guess, for the
moment, GDB gets it, but can it at least be called something meaningful?
A guess is CONVERT_FROM_BFD_CODE_PTR_ADDR(entry_point, bfd)? Better?
ENTRY_POINT_FROM_BFD? (I believe FUNC in the above should have been CODE?).
Your also going to need documentation.
Andrew
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2003-07-01 22:53 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2003-06-11 13:21 Jim Blandy
2003-06-11 13:26 ` Andrew Cagney
2003-06-11 13:48 ` Andrew Cagney
2003-06-12 20:59 ` Jim Blandy
2003-06-12 22:25 ` Andrew Cagney
2003-06-11 23:11 ` Kevin Buettner
2003-06-13 22:31 ` Jim Blandy
2003-06-13 22:48 ` Kevin Buettner
2003-06-13 23:38 ` Andrew Cagney
2003-06-27 18:46 ` Andrew Cagney
2003-06-30 22:52 ` Jim Blandy
2003-07-01 22:53 ` Andrew Cagney [this message]
2003-08-28 22:48 ` Andrew Cagney
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=3F0210EA.8050009@redhat.com \
--to=ac131313@redhat.com \
--cc=gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com \
--cc=jimb@redhat.com \
--cc=kevinb@redhat.com \
/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