From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gdb-patches-return-95030-listarch-gdb-patches=sources.redhat.com@sourceware.org>
Received: (qmail 12982 invoked by alias); 3 Oct 2012 15:26:41 -0000
Received: (qmail 12948 invoked by uid 22791); 3 Oct 2012 15:26:39 -0000
X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-3.1 required=5.0	tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FROM,KHOP_RCVD_TRUST,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_YE,TW_XF
X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Received: from mail-vc0-f169.google.com (HELO mail-vc0-f169.google.com) (209.85.220.169)    by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Wed, 03 Oct 2012 15:26:36 +0000
Received: by vcbfl17 with SMTP id fl17so9557832vcb.0        for <gdb-patches@sourceware.org>; Wed, 03 Oct 2012 08:26:35 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.52.31.101 with SMTP id z5mr1083226vdh.57.1349277994852; Wed, 03 Oct 2012 08:26:34 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.58.146.138 with HTTP; Wed, 3 Oct 2012 08:26:34 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Wed, 03 Oct 2012 15:26:00 -0000
Message-ID: <CAMe9rOrOnd8mnjrhbKNkkDajQ_CwjOF5kSZnZdDSbf8Gv0aQEA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: PING: PATCH: PR backtrace/14646: [x32] backtrace doesn't work
From: "H.J. Lu" <hjl.tools@gmail.com>
To: GDB <gdb-patches@sourceware.org>
Cc: mark.kettenis@xs4all.nl
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
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: 2012-10/txt/msg00038.txt.bz2

On Sun, Sep 30, 2012 at 2:40 PM, H.J. Lu <hjl.tools@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> amd64_x32_init_abi has
>
>   tdep->sp_regnum_from_eax = AMD64_RSP_REGNUM;
>   tdep->pc_regnum_from_eax = AMD64_RIP_REGNUM;
>
> But unwind frame info is based on the real RSP/RIP
> registers.  Pseudo sp/pc registers don't work with
> frame related codes:
>
> [hjl@gnu-tools-1 gdb]$ egrep "pc_regnum|sp_regnum" *fram*.c
> dwarf2-frame.c:  if (regnum == gdbarch_pc_regnum (gdbarch))
> dwarf2-frame.c:  else if (regnum == gdbarch_sp_regnum (gdbarch))
> dwarf2-frame.c:          == gdbarch_sp_regnum (gdbarch)))
> dwarf2-frame-tailcall.c:  if (regnum == gdbarch_pc_regnum
> (this_gdbarch))
> dwarf2-frame-tailcall.c:  else if (cache->prev_sp_p && regnum ==
> gdbarch_sp_regnum (this_gdbarch))
> dwarf2-frame-tailcall.c:      int sp_regnum;
> dwarf2-frame-tailcall.c:      sp_regnum = gdbarch_sp_regnum
> (prev_gdbarch);
> dwarf2-frame-tailcall.c:      if (sp_regnum == -1)
> dwarf2-frame-tailcall.c:      prev_sp = frame_unwind_register_unsigned
> (this_frame, sp_regnum);
> frame.c:      && gdbarch_pc_regnum (gdbarch) >= 0
> frame.c:                      gdbarch_pc_regnum (gdbarch),
> frame.c:                      gdbarch_pc_regnum (gdbarch),
> frame.c:     the gdbarch_sp_regnum register is meaningful.  */
> frame.c:  if (gdbarch_sp_regnum (gdbarch) >= 0)
> frame.c:                    gdbarch_sp_regnum (gdbarch));
> [hjl@gnu-tools-1 gdb]$
>
> It is nice to print
>
> (gdb) p $sp
> $1 = (void *) 0xffffd028
>
> instead of
>
> (gdb) p $sp
> $1 = 4294955048
>
> But it breaks frame unwind.  This patch removes pseudo sp/pc regnum from
> x32.  "p $sp" and "p $pc" will print 64bit integers.  But "p $esp" and
> "p $esp" work fine.  OK for trunk and 4.5 branch?
>
> Thanks.
>
>
> H.J.
> ---
> 2012-09-30  H.J. Lu  <hongjiu.lu@intel.com>
>
>         PR backtrace/14646
>         PR gdb/14647
>         * i386-tdep.h (gdbarch_tdep): Remove sp_regnum_from_eax and
>         pc_regnum_from_eax.
>         * i386-tdep.c (i386_gdbarch_init): Don't use sp_regnum_from_eax
>         nor pc_regnum_from_eax.
>         * amd64-tdep.c (amd64_x32_init_abi): Don't set sp_regnum_from_eax
>         nor pc_regnum_from_eax.
>

PING.

-- 
H.J.