From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 28963 invoked by alias); 9 Sep 2003 03:00:43 -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 28535 invoked from network); 9 Sep 2003 03:00:32 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO localhost.redhat.com) (65.49.0.121) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 9 Sep 2003 03:00:32 -0000 Received: from redhat.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BB6D82B90; Mon, 8 Sep 2003 20:12:23 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <3F5D1AE7.7020306@redhat.com> Date: Tue, 09 Sep 2003 03:00:00 -0000 From: Andrew Cagney User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; NetBSD macppc; en-US; rv:1.0.2) Gecko/20030820 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Daniel Jacobowitz Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [rfa/6.0] Better handle unspecified CFI values References: <3F593115.4030407@redhat.com> <20030906213351.GA1101@nevyn.them.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2003-09/txt/msg00143.txt.bz2 > On Fri, Sep 05, 2003 at 08:57:57PM -0400, Andrew Cagney wrote: > >> - delete the SP_REGNUM hack from the REG_UNDEFINED rule (it's no longer >> needed, I think) > > > Leaving the hack in REG_UNSPECIFIED? Yes, I'm pretty sure you're > right. Yes, leaving the hack in REG_UNSPECIFIED - I know that one's needed :-) >> - add a check/complaint for the SP v CFA problem. > > > Could you hold off on the complaint until there's a valid way to > specify the SP in the unwind information? Right now there isn't one, > as I described on the dwarf2 list three weeks ago. Arrrrgh. So "sp" should be specified as the same value as the "cfa" register? > Otherwise this looks good to me. m'kay >> @@ -611,7 +646,9 @@ >> >> switch (cache->reg[regnum].how) >> { >> - case REG_UNSAVED: >> + case REG_UNDEFINED: >> + /* If CFI explicitly specified that the value isn't defined, >> + mark it as optomized away - the value isn't available. */ > > > "optimized" Oops fixed (contrary to the patch I just posted). Andrew