From: Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>
To: Kevin Buettner <kevinb@redhat.com>, gdb-patches@sourceware.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/4] Allow display of negative offsets in print_address_symbolic()
Date: Fri, 21 Jun 2019 14:45:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <f6b7805e-cb98-2539-72f6-bc10600b8bc8@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190608195434.26512-4-kevinb@redhat.com>
On 6/8/19 8:54 PM, Kevin Buettner wrote:
> When examining addresses associated with blocks with non-contiguous
> address ranges, it's not uncommon to see large positive offsets which,
> for some address width, actually represent a smaller negative offset.
> Here's an example taken from the test case:
>
> (gdb) x/i foo_cold
> 0x40110d <foo+4294967277>: push %rbp
>
> This commit causes cases like the above to be displayed like this (below)
> instead:
>
> (gdb) x/i foo_cold
> 0x40110d <foo-19>: push %rbp
>
> gdb/ChangeLog:
>
> * printcmd.c (print_address_symbolic): Print negative offsets.
> (build_address_symbolic): Force signed arithmetic when computing
> offset.
Seems reasonable to me, if we assume that the symbol name to put
within <> is "foo".
This change makes makes me doubt that, though. We're looking at
the lower level, disassembly code. I think I'd want to see
0x40110d <foo_cold+0>:
there?
E.g., I might want to follow up with
disassemble foo_cold.
But the present state of things, I wouldn't be able to see the
foo_cold symbol, where it starts?
Maybe a larger disassemble output including several cold sections
in view would help determine the best output.
Thanks,
Pedro Alves
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-06-21 14:45 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-06-08 19:55 [PATCH 0/4] Non-contiguous address range bug fixes / improvements Kevin Buettner
2019-06-08 19:55 ` [PATCH 3/4] Allow display of negative offsets in print_address_symbolic() Kevin Buettner
2019-06-21 14:45 ` Pedro Alves [this message]
2019-07-03 23:09 ` Kevin Buettner
2019-07-04 1:06 ` Kevin Buettner
2019-06-08 19:55 ` [PATCH 2/4] dwarf2-frame.c: Fix FDE processing bug involving non-contiguous ranges Kevin Buettner
2019-06-21 14:34 ` Pedro Alves
2019-06-08 19:55 ` [PATCH 1/4] Prefer symtab symbol over minsym for function names in non-contiguous blocks Kevin Buettner
2019-06-21 14:26 ` Pedro Alves
2019-06-26 17:30 ` Tom Tromey
2019-07-03 23:16 ` Kevin Buettner
2019-06-08 19:55 ` [PATCH 4/4] Improve test gdb.dwarf2/dw2-ranges-func.exp Kevin Buettner
2019-06-26 17:24 ` [PATCH 0/4] Non-contiguous address range bug fixes / improvements Tom Tromey
2019-07-03 20:10 ` Kevin Buettner
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=f6b7805e-cb98-2539-72f6-bc10600b8bc8@redhat.com \
--to=palves@redhat.com \
--cc=gdb-patches@sourceware.org \
--cc=kevinb@redhat.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