From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 29462 invoked by alias); 1 Jul 2003 23:24:49 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 29454 invoked from network); 1 Jul 2003 23:24:48 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO localhost.redhat.com) (24.157.166.107) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 1 Jul 2003 23:24:48 -0000 Received: from redhat.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 62E0F2B5F; Tue, 1 Jul 2003 19:24:38 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <3F021836.6090809@redhat.com> Date: Tue, 01 Jul 2003 23:24:00 -0000 From: Andrew Cagney User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; NetBSD macppc; en-US; rv:1.0.2) Gecko/20030223 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Daniel Jacobowitz Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com, rearnsha@arm.com Subject: Re: [RFA/ARM] Framificate the ARM port [3/3] References: <20030630225509.GA30844@nevyn.them.org> <3F01D27B.8070603@redhat.com> <20030701222615.GA13782@nevyn.them.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2003-07/txt/msg00025.txt.bz2 > Just in case you're wondering. >> >> This would break any architecture that didn't have an FP called "fp". >> This is because, "$fp" defaults to get_frame_base() ... :-( > > > Argh! :-) > get_frame_base_address defaults to get_frame_base; I could update > value_of_builtin_frame_fp_reg safely, I think. But I have no idea > where that would end up, so I'm going to defer to your judgement on > this if you've got a preference... kfail arm-*-* gdb/497? Having value_of_builtin_frame_fp_reg return get_frame_base_address is certainly more correct. The intent was for $fp to return the ABI's virtual frame base register. Try it. PS: ARM $fp confusion fixed? http://sources.redhat.com/cgi-bin/gnatsweb.pl?cmd=view%20audit-trail&database=gdb&pr=479