From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 12346 invoked by alias); 17 Dec 2007 19:51:20 -0000 Received: (qmail 12336 invoked by uid 22791); 17 Dec 2007 19:51:20 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mail.codesourcery.com (HELO mail.codesourcery.com) (65.74.133.4) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Mon, 17 Dec 2007 19:51:14 +0000 Received: (qmail 31607 invoked from network); 17 Dec 2007 19:51:12 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO localhost) (jimb@127.0.0.2) by mail.codesourcery.com with ESMTPA; 17 Dec 2007 19:51:12 -0000 To: Ulrich Weigand Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [rfc] Make DWARF-2 "address size" explicit References: <200712091939.lB9Jdt17019619@d12av02.megacenter.de.ibm.com> <20071216215917.GI2618@caradoc.them.org> From: Jim Blandy Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 20:06:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: <20071216215917.GI2618@caradoc.them.org> (Daniel Jacobowitz's message of "Sun, 16 Dec 2007 16:59:17 -0500") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.0.50 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2007-12/txt/msg00282.txt.bz2 Daniel Jacobowitz writes: > On Sun, Dec 09, 2007 at 08:39:55PM +0100, Ulrich Weigand wrote: >> This patch changes this by making the parameter explicit as member >> of the dwarf_expr_context structure. The core DWARF expresssion >> engine thus no longer needs to make this assumption. > > Seems right to me! This is certainly a step in the right direction. However, the proper value to use for addr_size is the one that comes from the header of the compilation unit containing the expression. (The fact that there's no compilation unit associated with the frame information is an existing problem.) I had a patch to carry that through from a long while back. A fellow from Intel has been working on updating it; I've encouraged him to post it here. http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2006-05/msg00226.html