From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from smtp.polymtl.ca (smtp.polymtl.ca [132.207.4.11]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D128E384402D for ; Thu, 2 Jul 2020 14:25:24 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 sourceware.org D128E384402D Received: from simark.ca (simark.ca [158.69.221.121]) (authenticated bits=0) by smtp.polymtl.ca (8.14.7/8.14.7) with ESMTP id 062EP8UK007915 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Thu, 2 Jul 2020 10:25:13 -0400 DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 smtp.polymtl.ca 062EP8UK007915 Received: from [10.0.0.11] (173-246-6-90.qc.cable.ebox.net [173.246.6.90]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by simark.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 0EB331E5F9; Thu, 2 Jul 2020 10:25:07 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Re: Building today's snapshot of GDB with MinGW To: Eli Zaretskii Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org, brobecker@adacore.com, tromey@adacore.com References: <83a70l20dn.fsf@gnu.org> <83wo3ozlvn.fsf@gnu.org> <56f26808-dfb0-6703-6f1f-9818c35946dd@polymtl.ca> <83pn9fxofc.fsf@gnu.org> <83v9j6vxey.fsf@gnu.org> From: Simon Marchi Message-ID: <9876615e-ab54-9fc4-4892-f855901e951e@polymtl.ca> Date: Thu, 2 Jul 2020 10:25:07 -0400 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.10.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <83v9j6vxey.fsf@gnu.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: fr Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Poly-FromMTA: (simark.ca [158.69.221.121]) at Thu, 2 Jul 2020 14:25:08 +0000 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.1 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, DKIM_VALID_EF, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL, SPF_HELO_PASS, SPF_PASS, TXREP autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on server2.sourceware.org X-BeenThere: gdb-patches@sourceware.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Gdb-patches mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 02 Jul 2020 14:25:26 -0000 On 2020-07-02 9:50 a.m., Eli Zaretskii wrote: >> Date: Wed, 01 Jul 2020 18:09:11 +0300 >> From: Eli Zaretskii >> Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org, brobecker@adacore.com, tromey@adacore.com >> >>> We would not expect GDB to complain for Windows on i386:x86-64. >>> >>> The first thing I would do is make sure that the function _initialize_amd64_windows_tdep >>> gets executed at startup in your GDB. This is the function that registers a handler for >>> the tuple (i386:x86-64, Windows). >> >> Thanks, I will take a look there and report what I see. > > I started looking at the code, but then I had a eureka moment. You > mentioned _initialize_amd64_windows_tdep, so I presume you assumed my > build is a 64-bit one? It isn't: it's a 3--bit build, and thus > _initialize_amd64_windows_tdep is not even compiled into the binary. > > Given that my build is a 32-bit one, it sounds expected to see > warnings I cited, as they all complain about 64-bit architectures, > right? > > Incidentally, I wonder why the gdbarch selftest is trying > architectures that are not supported and not even compiled in. What > is the purpose of doing that? It loops over all the architectures known to bfd. So I suppose that in BFD, enabling support for i386 enables support for x86-64, that it all comes together. But in GDB, when configuring GDB for a Windows i386 target, we don't add support for Windows x86-64 targets. So the warnings you see make sense. I noticed that when configuring GDB for an i386/Linux target, we also throw in support for amd64/Linux as well if $enable_64_bit_bfd is true (which allows a 32-bit program to read a large > 4GB executable, I suppose): 290 i[34567]86-*-linux*) 291 # Target: Intel 386 running GNU/Linux 292 gdb_target_obs="i386-linux-tdep.o \ 293 glibc-tdep.o \ 294 solib-svr4.o symfile-mem.o \ 295 linux-tdep.o linux-record.o" 296 if test "x$enable_64_bit_bfd" = "xyes"; then 297 # Target: GNU/Linux x86-64 298 gdb_target_obs="amd64-linux-tdep.o ${gdb_target_obs}" 299 fi 300 ;; We could perhaps do the same for Windows, I don't think there would be any downsides to it, and it could be useful to some people. Simon