From: Yao Qi <qiyaoltc@gmail.com>
To: "Ulrich Weigand" <uweigand@de.ibm.com>
Cc: palves@redhat.com (Pedro Alves), gdb-patches@sourceware.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] Clear non-significant bits of address on memory access
Date: Fri, 08 Dec 2017 15:36:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <86374lp6zd.fsf@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20171208151322.30013D8048A@oc3748833570.ibm.com> (Ulrich Weigand's message of "Fri, 8 Dec 2017 16:13:22 +0100 (CET)")
"Ulrich Weigand" <uweigand@de.ibm.com> writes:
> This seems to duplicate the functionality of gdbarch_addr_bits_remove
> to some extent ... Could those be merged back again?
They are a little bit different, addr_bits_remove only applies to PC (for
arm and mips), but significant_addr_bit applies to every address (both
data and instruction). On the other hand, the LSB of address in arm and
mips is still significant, but it has some different meaning other than
address when it is the target address of branch. We only clear the LSB
when it is the target address. In normal memory access, watchpoing
setting, we don't clear it.
Simon asked the same question, see
https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2017-11/msg00213.html
These two gdbarch methods are quite similar, but difficult to merge
these two, unless we bring more context in the gdbarch hook method.
--
Yao (齐尧)
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-12-08 15:36 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 40+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-12-08 10:04 [PATCH 0/3 v3] [AArch64] Support tagged pointer Yao Qi
2017-12-08 10:04 ` [PATCH 1/3] Clear non-significant bits of address on memory access Yao Qi
2017-12-08 12:22 ` Pedro Alves
2017-12-08 15:13 ` Ulrich Weigand
2017-12-08 15:36 ` Yao Qi [this message]
2017-12-19 13:50 ` Ulrich Weigand
2017-12-19 15:41 ` Yao Qi
2017-12-19 16:15 ` Ulrich Weigand
2017-12-20 9:57 ` Yao Qi
2017-12-20 13:03 ` [pushed] Fix Cell/B.E. regression (Re: [PATCH 1/3] Clear non-significant bits of address on memory access) Ulrich Weigand
2017-12-20 13:59 ` Yao Qi
2017-12-08 10:04 ` [PATCH 2/3] Adjust breakpoint address by clearing non-significant bits Yao Qi
2017-12-08 12:22 ` Pedro Alves
2017-12-08 10:04 ` [PATCH 3/3] Clear non-significant bits of address in watchpoint Yao Qi
2017-12-08 12:23 ` Pedro Alves
2017-12-08 12:24 ` [PATCH 0/3 v3] [AArch64] Support tagged pointer Pedro Alves
2017-12-08 17:31 ` Yao Qi
2018-04-11 0:16 ` Omair Javaid
2018-04-11 0:37 ` Omair Javaid
2018-04-11 2:46 ` Simon Marchi
2018-04-11 10:14 ` Pedro Alves
2018-04-11 11:13 ` Omair Javaid
2018-04-11 11:19 ` Pedro Alves
2018-04-11 12:01 ` Omair Javaid
2018-04-11 18:27 ` Pedro Alves
2018-04-16 1:36 ` Omair Javaid
2018-04-16 22:57 ` Pedro Alves
2018-04-20 14:34 ` Omair Javaid
2018-04-20 16:13 ` Daniel Thompson
2018-04-23 7:50 ` Omair Javaid
2018-04-24 11:39 ` Pedro Alves
2018-04-24 15:44 ` Daniel Thompson
2018-04-24 11:48 ` Pedro Alves
2018-04-24 16:05 ` Daniel Thompson
2018-04-24 23:42 ` Omair Javaid
2018-04-25 0:09 ` Andrew Pinski
2018-04-25 8:04 ` Daniel Thompson
2018-04-26 8:11 ` Omair Javaid
2018-04-27 16:29 ` Daniel Thompson
2018-04-30 13:42 ` Omair Javaid
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=86374lp6zd.fsf@gmail.com \
--to=qiyaoltc@gmail.com \
--cc=gdb-patches@sourceware.org \
--cc=palves@redhat.com \
--cc=uweigand@de.ibm.com \
/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