From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 12753 invoked by alias); 25 Jun 2009 16:14:47 -0000 Received: (qmail 12743 invoked by uid 22791); 25 Jun 2009 16:14:45 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mx2.redhat.com (HELO mx2.redhat.com) (66.187.237.31) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Thu, 25 Jun 2009 16:14:39 +0000 Received: from int-mx2.corp.redhat.com (int-mx2.corp.redhat.com [172.16.27.26]) by mx2.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n5PGEYFN023801; Thu, 25 Jun 2009 12:14:34 -0400 Received: from ns3.rdu.redhat.com (ns3.rdu.redhat.com [10.11.255.199]) by int-mx2.corp.redhat.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id n5PGEWYT014300; Thu, 25 Jun 2009 12:14:33 -0400 Received: from opsy.redhat.com (vpn-13-18.rdu.redhat.com [10.11.13.18]) by ns3.rdu.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n5PGEWR3031653; Thu, 25 Jun 2009 12:14:32 -0400 Received: by opsy.redhat.com (Postfix, from userid 500) id 7B2793785DB; Thu, 25 Jun 2009 10:14:31 -0600 (MDT) To: ppluzhnikov@google.com (Paul Pluzhnikov) Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [rfc][patch] Fix for gdb/10275 (mis-handling of DW_CFA_restore_state) References: <20090613012804.BD89576BC4@localhost> From: Tom Tromey Reply-To: tromey@redhat.com Date: Thu, 25 Jun 2009 16:14:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: <20090613012804.BD89576BC4@localhost> (Paul Pluzhnikov's message of "Fri\, 12 Jun 2009 18\:28\:04 -0700 \(PDT\)") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii 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: 2009-06/txt/msg00672.txt.bz2 >>>>> "Paul" == Paul Pluzhnikov writes: Paul> Fixing this looks easier than I expected :-) Paul> Regtested on Linux/x86_64 (no regressions). This looks reasonable to me. Paul> I also verified that I get correct stack for my reduced test case in Paul> gdb/10275, and in my real gcc-4.5 compiled optimized code. Paul> If this looks correct, I'll add a test case. Yes, please do. Thanks. Paul> + fs->regs.cfa_reg = dwarf2_frame_adjust_regnum (gdbarch, fs->regs.cfa_reg, This line looks like it wraps now. Tom