From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 23585 invoked by alias); 19 May 2003 07:09:37 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 23527 invoked from network); 19 May 2003 07:09:35 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO Cantor.suse.de) (213.95.15.193) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 19 May 2003 07:09:35 -0000 Received: from Hermes.suse.de (Hermes.suse.de [213.95.15.136]) by Cantor.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5493114664; Mon, 19 May 2003 09:09:35 +0200 (MEST) Received: from aj by arthur.inka.de with local (Exim 4.12) id 19Hem5-0004xr-00; Mon, 19 May 2003 09:09:33 +0200 To: Michal Ludvig Cc: Mark Kettenis , gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [PATCH/i386newframe] amd64newframe References: <200305172226.h4HMQ8nJ010688@elgar.kettenis.dyndns.org> <3EC8810F.3040905@suse.cz> From: Andreas Jaeger Date: Mon, 19 May 2003 07:09:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: <3EC8810F.3040905@suse.cz> (Michal Ludvig's message of "Mon, 19 May 2003 09:00:31 +0200") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.1003 (Gnus v5.10.3) XEmacs/21.4 (Portable Code, linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-SW-Source: 2003-05/txt/msg00331.txt.bz2 Michal Ludvig writes: > Mark Kettenis told me that: >> (gdb) warning: Unmapped DWARF Register #16 encountered >> 6 return 0; >> (gdb) warning: Unmapped DWARF Register #16 encountered >> 7 } >> Ah, that must be the new DWARF CFI frame unwinder. The return >> address >> RA isn't mapped. I could change the DWARF register mapping in >> x86-64-tdep.c, but this really is a problem with the DWARF CFI frame >> unwinder since the compiler is free to choose any number it wants for >> the return address column. Should be fixed now. > > IMHO compiler shouldn't choose whatever it wants - RA column is > defined in the Amd64 ABI (sec.3.6). > > Anyway thanks for moving amd64 target to the new unwinder! Yes, thanks! Michal, can you help testing, please? > BTW could we add amd64 as an alias to x86_64 for configure scripts? config.* handles it already correctly, Andreas -- Andreas Jaeger SuSE Labs aj@suse.de private aj@arthur.inka.de http://www.suse.de/~aj