From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 127063 invoked by alias); 10 Sep 2015 15:07:52 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 127044 invoked by uid 89); 10 Sep 2015 15:07:51 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.4 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,KAM_LAZY_DOMAIN_SECURITY,SPF_HELO_PASS,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD autolearn=no version=3.3.2 X-HELO: mx1.redhat.com Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with (AES256-GCM-SHA384 encrypted) ESMTPS; Thu, 10 Sep 2015 15:07:50 +0000 Received: from int-mx13.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx13.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.26]) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AE4DBA9A; Thu, 10 Sep 2015 15:07:49 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (ovpn01.gateway.prod.ext.ams2.redhat.com [10.39.146.11]) by int-mx13.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id t8AF7lkB006140; Thu, 10 Sep 2015 11:07:48 -0400 Message-ID: <55F19CC3.8080001@redhat.com> Date: Thu, 10 Sep 2015 15:07:00 -0000 From: Pedro Alves User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.5.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Paul Pluzhnikov , Mark Kettenis CC: gdb-patches ml , macro@linux-mips.org Subject: Re: [patch] Fix BZ15121 -- x/a broken for addresses in shared libraries References: <55F19100.30600@redhat.com> <201509101433.t8AEX5Cw008716@glazunov.sibelius.xs4all.nl> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2015-09/txt/msg00173.txt.bz2 On 09/10/2015 04:00 PM, Paul Pluzhnikov wrote: > On Thu, Sep 10, 2015 at 7:33 AM, Mark Kettenis wrote: > >>> From: Pedro Alves > >>> Do we need to keep sign-extending on MIPS? Adding Maciej. >> >> I'm pretty sure you do. > > What makes MIPS special? > > I can't imagine any reason why (upper levels of) 64-bit GDB would need > to be lied to that the 32-bit inferior's 0x80000004 pointer has > CORE_ADDR value of 0xFFFFFFFF80000004. MIPS has signed addresses, at the hardware level. Thus a 32-bit ABI on a 64-bit machine ends up seeing with sign-extended addresses. See e.g.: https://www.sourceware.org/ml/gdb/2002-09/msg00084.html Thanks, Pedro Alves