Mirror of the gdb-patches mailing list
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: David Edelsohn <dje.gcc@gmail.com>
To: Ulrich Weigand <uweigand@de.ibm.com>
Cc: geoffk@geoffk.org, jakub@redhat.com, gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org,
		binutils@sourceware.org, gdb-patches@sourceware.org
Subject: Re: [RFC] Wrong register numbers in .dwarf_frame on Linux/PowerPC
Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2012 20:04:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAGWvnykKKQ8YBGEXp1_Kvo5j=7Yt9gBmfNuMuXNQ=-gcPS1b0g@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <201211261910.qAQJA63I009670@d06av02.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com>

On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 2:10 PM, Ulrich Weigand <uweigand@de.ibm.com> wrote:

> So I'm wondering where to go from here.  I guess we could:
>
> 1. Bring GCC (and gas) behaviour in compliance with the documented ABI
>    by removing the #undef DBX_REGISTER_NUMBER and changing gas's
>    md_reg_eh_frame_to_debug_frame to the original implementation from
>    Jakub's patch.  That would make GDB work well on new files, but
>    there are a large number of binaries out there where we continue
>    to have the same behaviour as today ...
>
> 2. Leave GCC and gas as-is and modify GDB to expect GCC numbering in
>    .dwarf_frame, except for the condition code register.  This would
>    break debugging of files built with GCC 4.0 and 4.1 unless we
>    want to add a special hack for that.
>
> 3. Like 2., but remove the condition code hack: simply use identical
>    numbers in .eh_frame and .dwarf_frame.  This would make PowerPC
>    like other Linux platforms in that respect.
>
> Thoughts?

I vote for (3).

Thanks, David


  reply	other threads:[~2012-11-26 20:04 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2012-11-26 19:10 Ulrich Weigand
2012-11-26 20:04 ` David Edelsohn [this message]
2012-11-27 19:12   ` Ulrich Weigand
2012-11-26 20:14 ` Mark Kettenis
2012-11-27 18:43   ` Ulrich Weigand
2012-11-27 19:13     ` Mark Kettenis
2012-11-27  9:26 ` Mark Wielaard
2012-11-27 18:49   ` Ulrich Weigand
2012-11-28 11:27     ` Mark Wielaard

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='CAGWvnykKKQ8YBGEXp1_Kvo5j=7Yt9gBmfNuMuXNQ=-gcPS1b0g@mail.gmail.com' \
    --to=dje.gcc@gmail.com \
    --cc=binutils@sourceware.org \
    --cc=gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org \
    --cc=gdb-patches@sourceware.org \
    --cc=geoffk@geoffk.org \
    --cc=jakub@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