Re: [RFC]: patch #2 for Sun C compiled target programs

[Michael Mueller <m.mueller99@kay-mueller.de>]

Mark Kettenis wrote:
>    Date: Mon, 21 Jun 2004 17:04:33 +0200
>    From: Michael Mueller <m.mueller99@kay-mueller.de>
> 
>    > 
>    > The real problem is that dbxread.c was initially written as 32-bit
>    > only code.  The sign-extension problem you're seeing here can also be
>    > interpreted as a 64-bit-dirty issue.
> 
>    So how can it be fixed?
> 
> Not sure.  As I said, it's not easy.  As far as I understand things,
> INTERNALIZE_SYMBOL() should look at n_type to decide whether n_value
> should be treated as a signed or an unsigned value.  The problem seems
> to be that n_value can either be interpreted as an address or as an
> offset.  Addresses should be sign-extended based on what
> bfd_get_sign_extend_vma() tells us.  Offsets should probably always be
> sign-extended.
> 
> Mark
> 


How about sign extending it a bit alter in process_one_symbol when we 
find out it's a stack variable? I cannot imagine an architecture where a 
stack variable has an absolute address. But my imagination is limited.

Michael