Mirror of the gdb-patches mailing list
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Yao Qi <yao@codesourcery.com>
To: gdb-patches@sourceware.org
Subject: Re: [patch, arm] Consistent display of registers in corefile
Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2010 15:07:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4D024205.1010704@codesourcery.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <201012101443.oBAEhFiT023638@glazunov.sibelius.xs4all.nl>

On 12/10/2010 10:43 PM, Mark Kettenis wrote:
>> Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2010 21:37:30 +0800
>> From: Yao Qi <yao@codesourcery.com>
>>
>> GDB trunk has a test failure on ARM,
>>
>>    FAIL: gdb.base/gcore.exp: corefile restored general registers
>>
>> In short, this failure is caused by output of 'info registers' before
>> coredump doesn't match output of 'info registers' when corefole is
>> loaded again, there are mainly two differences, [1] and [2].
>>
>> Output before coredump,
>> r0             0x12008  73736^M
>> r1             0xbea1f0c0       -1096683328^M
>> [...]
>> sp             0xbea1f0a4       0xbea1f0a4^M
>> lr             0x849b   33947^M
>> pc             0x83fc   0x83fc <terminal_func+4>^M
>> cpsr           0x20000030       536870960^M
>>
>> Output when corefile is loaded,
>> r0             0x12008  73736^M
>> r1             0xbea1f0c0       3198283968^M  // <---- [1]
>> [...]
>> sp             0xbea1f0a4       0xbea1f0a4^M
>> lr             0x849b   33947^M
>> pc             0x83fc   0x83fc <terminal_func+4>^M
>> fps            0x727a622f       1920623151^M  // <---- [2]
>> cpsr           0x20000030       536870960^M
>>
>> The difference [1] is caused by different register types, uint32 vs.
>> int32.  In tdesc, the type of general register is "int", while in
>> arm_register_type, it is regarded as builtin_uint32.  This can be fixed
>> when register type is handled in a consistent way (in reg_type.patch).
> 
> I would suspect that the proper thing to do would be to align the
> tdesc with the code instead of the other way around.  The arm-core.xml
> file seems to underspecify things by omitting the type=xxx clause on
> many registers.  Whoever wrote arm_register_type() at least had to
> make a conscious decision about the signedness of the type used for
> the general purpose registers.

I prefer unsigned for general purpose registers.  Any objections?  If we
agree on this, I'll add type="uint32" to r0-r12 in arm-core.xml.

-- 
Yao (齐尧)


  reply	other threads:[~2010-12-10 15:07 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2010-12-10 13:37 Yao Qi
2010-12-10 14:46 ` Mark Kettenis
2010-12-10 15:07   ` Yao Qi [this message]
2010-12-13  2:57   ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2010-12-13 10:00     ` Yao Qi
2010-12-19 18:24       ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2010-12-20  2:29         ` Yao Qi
2010-12-20  3:09           ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2011-01-13 13:45 ` Yao Qi
2011-01-13 16:04   ` Ulrich Weigand
2011-01-13 16:47     ` Yao Qi
2011-01-14 16:52       ` Ulrich Weigand

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=4D024205.1010704@codesourcery.com \
    --to=yao@codesourcery.com \
    --cc=gdb-patches@sourceware.org \
    /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