From: Omair Javaid <omair.javaid@linaro.org>
To: Yao Qi <yao@codesourcery.com>
Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org, Patch Tracking <patches@linaro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] testsuite/gdb.dwarf2: Fix for dw2-ifort-parameter failure on ARM
Date: Tue, 01 Oct 2013 09:53:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CANW4E-2t0zYbDWfHzk3Sn8oTxGPZKdaTNBqtkjkHZofWnvJzzg@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CANW4E-0vd51dTvd5qxUbeDn7ebXV-cf+WS4+VpyyGyD0MYGk8Q@mail.gmail.com>
On 19 September 2013 20:30, Omair Javaid <omair.javaid@linaro.org> wrote:
> Yao,
>
> Thanks for your feedback.
>
> Here is the testcase without my patch and breakpoint address gets
> adjusted because an odd address was being used:
>
> (gdb) break func
> warning: Breakpoint address adjusted from 0x000083bd to 0x000083bc.
> Breakpoint 1 at 0x83bc (2 locations)
> (gdb) run
> Starting program:
> /home/linaro/omair/bug_triage/gdb-7.6/gdb/testsuite/gdb.dwarf2/dw2-ifort-parameter
> warning: Breakpoint address adjusted from 0x000083bd to 0x000083bc.
> warning: Breakpoint address adjusted from 0x000083bd to 0x000083bc.
> warning: Breakpoint address adjusted from 0x000083bd to 0x000083bc.
> warning: Breakpoint 1 address previously adjusted from 0x000083bd to 0x000083bc.
>
> Breakpoint 1, 0x000083bc in func ()
> (gdb) p/x param
> No symbol "param" in current context.
> (gdb) FAIL: gdb.dwarf2/dw2-ifort-parameter.exp: p/x param
> testcase ./gdb.dwarf2/dw2-ifort-parameter.exp completed in 0 seconds
>
> Can you suggest any other way to fix this issue.
>
> Thanks you for you help.
>
>
> --
> Omair.
>
> On 16 July 2013 03:52, Yao Qi <yao@codesourcery.com> wrote:
>> On 07/15/2013 06:25 PM, Omair Javaid wrote:
>>>
>>> gdb.dwarf2/dw2-ifort-parameter fails on ARM because the dwarf2 debug
>>> information being created by gdb.dwarf2/dw2-ifort-parameter-debug.S
>>> gets corrupted because LSB of function addresses is ON in Thumb mode.
>>> ARM instructions are word aligned and LSB of instruction address is
>>> used to determine whether code being branched to is Thumb or ARM code.
>>> This patch solves the problem by decrementing function address by one
>>> in thumb mode. This patch has been tested on x86_64 and arm7 machines.
>>
>>
>> Omair,
>> IMO, the last bit of "function pointer value" indicates whether the target
>> function is an ARM or a thumb one. The "address" should still refer to the
>> actual address, as "DWARF should tell the truth". What is wrong *without*
>> your patch?
>>
>> --
>> Yao (齐尧)
Ping? Any suggestions? I can actually add labels in c code of this
test case and use those labels instead of function pointer values.
Would that be fine?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-10-01 9:53 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <CANW4E-2bQYjx6YdR3qGyKUsQa_KOrtmkWsZYqKzcuQBF==RPpw@mail.gmail.com>
2013-07-15 10:25 ` Omair Javaid
2013-07-16 2:53 ` Yao Qi
2013-09-19 15:31 ` Omair Javaid
2013-10-01 9:53 ` Omair Javaid [this message]
2013-11-11 9:53 ` Yao Qi
2014-01-16 9:09 ` Omair Javaid
2014-01-16 9:17 ` Will Newton
2014-01-16 9:48 ` Pedro Alves
2014-01-16 9:51 ` Pedro Alves
2014-01-16 10:26 ` Omair Javaid
2014-01-16 12:35 ` Pedro Alves
2014-01-16 13:55 ` Omair Javaid
2014-01-16 14:00 ` Pedro Alves
2014-01-16 14:17 ` Omair Javaid
2014-01-16 16:24 ` Pedro Alves
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=CANW4E-2t0zYbDWfHzk3Sn8oTxGPZKdaTNBqtkjkHZofWnvJzzg@mail.gmail.com \
--to=omair.javaid@linaro.org \
--cc=gdb-patches@sourceware.org \
--cc=patches@linaro.org \
--cc=yao@codesourcery.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