From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 16491 invoked by alias); 29 Jun 2009 13:19:22 -0000 Received: (qmail 16477 invoked by uid 22791); 29 Jun 2009 13:19:21 -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; Mon, 29 Jun 2009 13:19:14 +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 n5TDJCRi019414 for ; Mon, 29 Jun 2009 09:19:12 -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 n5TDJCG6028485 for ; Mon, 29 Jun 2009 09:19:12 -0400 Received: from hase.home (vpn-10-97.str.redhat.com [10.32.10.97]) by ns3.rdu.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n5TDJA0n027352 for ; Mon, 29 Jun 2009 09:19:11 -0400 From: Andreas Schwab To: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: Don't overshoot when executing cfa instructions References: <20090627223341.GB14420@caradoc.them.org> X-Yow: Am I in GRADUATE SCHOOL yet? Date: Mon, 29 Jun 2009 13:19:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: <20090627223341.GB14420@caradoc.them.org> (Daniel Jacobowitz's message of "Sat, 27 Jun 2009 18:33:41 -0400") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.0.95 (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/msg00807.txt.bz2 Daniel Jacobowitz writes: > Actually, before approving this I have a question. What about state > changes caused by the branch? > > I remember a similar problem with location lists. Before the branch, > a variable lives at some location. Inside the called function, it is > gone. Did we ever find a representation for that? Does it rely > on the instruction after the branch marking the register as clobbered? Do you have a testcase, or a hint how to create one? Andreas. -- Andreas Schwab, aschwab@redhat.com GPG Key fingerprint = D4E8 DBE3 3813 BB5D FA84 5EC7 45C6 250E 6F00 984E "And now for something completely different."