From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gdb-patches-return-90666-listarch-gdb-patches=sources.redhat.com@sourceware.org>
Received: (qmail 572 invoked by alias); 3 May 2012 21:52:25 -0000
Received: (qmail 561 invoked by uid 22791); 3 May 2012 21:52:25 -0000
X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-4.9 required=5.0	tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FROM,KHOP_RCVD_TRUST,KHOP_THREADED,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_YE
X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Received: from mail-qa0-f48.google.com (HELO mail-qa0-f48.google.com) (209.85.216.48)    by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Thu, 03 May 2012 21:52:12 +0000
Received: by qady23 with SMTP id y23so806798qad.14        for <gdb-patches@sourceware.org>; Thu, 03 May 2012 14:52:11 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.224.8.205 with SMTP id i13mr6097009qai.83.1336081931540; Thu, 03 May 2012 14:52:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.229.169.130 with HTTP; Thu, 3 May 2012 14:52:11 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <201205032150.q43Lo33g014219@glazunov.sibelius.xs4all.nl>
References: <20120410202953.GA23862@intel.com>	<201204171143.q3HBh9LV021759@glazunov.sibelius.xs4all.nl>	<CAMe9rOoYnD4vBUobYp7xom=bK2APTBpaqSgdPQYsM0eBJG+Axw@mail.gmail.com>	<CAMe9rOpvcXA4_WSTUbWNUK76CdLuZXydzjzh5iUuOvPmzPvSEA@mail.gmail.com>	<CAMe9rOqmjGGqDzF+FZh292S72tyJk_Bw0GWpmrr4YHqCBu=YVw@mail.gmail.com>	<201205022143.q42Lhd3G018067@glazunov.sibelius.xs4all.nl>	<CAMe9rOrQAavAifu=+GzEgY4NV2vDWWeT64Cf9x6iVC=dMGLkaQ@mail.gmail.com>	<CAMe9rOqQrPBYrMaHCq5od9YZ0WfLMa5XDeo7EDih6EAZUaY6_A@mail.gmail.com>	<201205032150.q43Lo33g014219@glazunov.sibelius.xs4all.nl>
Date: Thu, 03 May 2012 21:52:00 -0000
Message-ID: <CAMe9rOpX9HmhhBneSnhttVRGTgUM5DBe2c9pLTNHvhaYpDV0hg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: PATCH: Also check for `movl %esp, %ebp' for x32
From: "H.J. Lu" <hjl.tools@gmail.com>
To: Mark Kettenis <mark.kettenis@xs4all.nl>
Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-IsSubscribed: yes
Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gdb-patches.sourceware.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gdb-patches-subscribe@sourceware.org>
List-Archive: <http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/>
List-Post: <mailto:gdb-patches@sourceware.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org
X-SW-Source: 2012-05/txt/msg00108.txt.bz2

On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 2:50 PM, Mark Kettenis <mark.kettenis@xs4all.nl> wro=
te:
>> >> I did have a look at it, but still have some questions.
>> >>
>> >>> Hi,
>> >>>
>> >>> X32 may use `movl %esp, %ebp' in prologue. =A0This patch checks it f=
or
>> >>> x32. =A0Tested on Linux/x86-64. =A0OK for trunk?
>> >>
>> >> But the prologues generated by various compilers are expected to be
>> >> otherwise the same for both the x32 ABI and the normal 64-bit ABI? =
=A0I
>> >> guess x32 has to use "pushq %rbp" as "pushl %ebp" isn't available.
>> >> And I guess you want to keep the stack 16-byte aligned anyway. =A0I
>> >> suppose that "movq %rsp, %rbp" is still ok for x32, but "movl %esp,
>> >> %ebp" can be encoded in less bytes, so it might be a bit more
>> >> efficient for x32.
>> >
>> > That is correct.
>>
>> Is my patch OK to install?
>
> Sorry, no. =A0I'm really unhappy with that multi-line if clause. =A0It
> really is hard to parse. =A0I'm trying to come up with a suggestion to
> make this better, but so far haven't succeeded.
>
> Does GCC ever generate the `mov %rsp,%rsp' instruction for x32?

Yes.  With -maddress-mode=3Dlong, gcc generates "mov %rsp,%rsp".
With -maddress-mode=3Dshort, gcc generates "mov %esp,%esp".


--=20
H.J.