From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 26181 invoked by alias); 4 Mar 2006 12:01:52 -0000 Received: (qmail 26173 invoked by uid 22791); 4 Mar 2006 12:01:51 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (66.187.233.31) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Sat, 04 Mar 2006 12:01:49 +0000 Received: from int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (int-mx1.corp.redhat.com [172.16.52.254]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id k24C1lex022947 for ; Sat, 4 Mar 2006 07:01:47 -0500 Received: from pobox.corp.redhat.com (pobox.corp.redhat.com [172.16.52.156]) by int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id k24C1l101788; Sat, 4 Mar 2006 07:01:47 -0500 Received: from free.oliva.athome.lsd.ic.unicamp.br (vpn50-43.rdu.redhat.com [172.16.50.43]) by pobox.corp.redhat.com (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id k24C1jNG004755; Sat, 4 Mar 2006 07:01:46 -0500 Received: from free.oliva.athome.lsd.ic.unicamp.br (free.oliva.athome.lsd.ic.unicamp.br [127.0.0.1]) by free.oliva.athome.lsd.ic.unicamp.br (8.13.5/8.13.5) with ESMTP id k24C1iEm027685; Sat, 4 Mar 2006 09:01:44 -0300 Received: (from aoliva@localhost) by free.oliva.athome.lsd.ic.unicamp.br (8.13.5/8.13.5/Submit) id k24C1ipD027684; Sat, 4 Mar 2006 09:01:44 -0300 To: Mark Kettenis Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: Support Dwarf3 DW_CFA_val_* expressions References: <200603041017.k24AHjh7024812@elgar.sibelius.xs4all.nl> From: Alexandre Oliva Date: Sat, 04 Mar 2006 14:43:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: <200603041017.k24AHjh7024812@elgar.sibelius.xs4all.nl> (Mark Kettenis's message of "Sat, 4 Mar 2006 11:17:45 +0100 (CET)") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.1007 (Gnus v5.10.7) XEmacs/21.4.18 (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-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2006-03/txt/msg00094.txt.bz2 On Mar 4, 2006, Mark Kettenis wrote: > Thanks, the code looks fine. Is this to be read as an ok to install? (Sorry, I've been just a lurker here in the past and I'm not entirely familiar with the rules about who can approve what, so I thought I'd ask instead of ASSuming :-) > It's also good to have a few testcases, > but I don't completely understand the testcases :( You're not alone in that feeling, I assure you :-) > You seem to mess > with a lot of GCC internals in them. Is the force_unwind() stuff > really necessary? Not for GDB, no. We don't even reach that point. I thought we'd be better off keeping the testcase in sync with GCC, so all I did was to add the initial comment. The execution within GDB doesn't ever reach the point of run-time-wise unwinding the stack. GDB does something similar by unwinding the stack to get a backtrace at the point from which the GCC unwinder would be called. > The tests are only enabled on Linux. Is there a > reason why they won't work on other i386 and amd64 systems that use a > recent enough GCC? I have no idea, I suppose someone with easy access to them could test them and let me know :-) At some point I had only the architectures listed in the .exp file, but then I thought that some of them might not even use Dwarf2+ debug info, and decided I'd go with only what I could test myself. > And what would be the minimum version of GCC > needed to run these tests? To actually run them successfully to completion, without the debugger interaction, you'd need some upcoming version of GCC, perhaps even with patches yet to be checked in. To compile it and run it up to the point we need in the GDB test, I'm pretty sure even GCC 2.95 would do; perhaps something even older than that. -- Alexandre Oliva http://www.lsd.ic.unicamp.br/~oliva/ Secretary for FSF Latin America http://www.fsfla.org/ Red Hat Compiler Engineer aoliva@{redhat.com, gcc.gnu.org} Free Software Evangelist oliva@{lsd.ic.unicamp.br, gnu.org}