From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 16437 invoked by alias); 25 Jan 2008 21:24:09 -0000 Received: (qmail 16428 invoked by uid 22791); 25 Jan 2008 21:24:09 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from py-out-1112.google.com (HELO py-out-1112.google.com) (64.233.166.180) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Fri, 25 Jan 2008 21:23:41 +0000 Received: by py-out-1112.google.com with SMTP id v53so977342pyh.33 for ; Fri, 25 Jan 2008 13:23:39 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.35.100.6 with SMTP id c6mr2786971pym.14.1201296219035; Fri, 25 Jan 2008 13:23:39 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.35.36.15 with HTTP; Fri, 25 Jan 2008 13:23:38 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <8f2776cb0801251323h3283932dq96bb3aab41d0ca8c@mail.gmail.com> Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2008 22:14:00 -0000 From: "Jim Blandy" To: "John David Anglin" Subject: Re: arm_addr_bits_remove Cc: "Carlos O'Donell" , brobecker@adacore.com, pedro@codesourcery.com, gdb-patches@sourceware.org, dave.anglin@nrc.ca In-Reply-To: <200801251849.m0PIncQu004356@hiauly1.hia.nrc.ca> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <47996465.6090201@codesourcery.com> <200801251849.m0PIncQu004356@hiauly1.hia.nrc.ca> X-Google-Sender-Auth: 703796806f009011 X-IsSubscribed: yes 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 X-SW-Source: 2008-01/txt/msg00620.txt.bz2 On Jan 25, 2008 10:49 AM, John David Anglin wrote: > Regarding symbol tables, I would have to check what the two bits are > used for. What struct/bits? Within GDB, the debug info readers call record_line to add each source location / pc mapping they find to GDB's internal tables. The issue at hand is that record_line currently calls gdbarch_addr_bits_remove on the pc values it's passed before recording them; apparently some debug info had extra bits set in the addresses in the line number info. Since this doesn't meet the spec (of either DWARF or STABS), it's a bug in the producer; the call to gdbarch_addr_bits_remove is meant to work around that bug. We've been discussing removing that call, since it has caused problems recently.