From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 21096 invoked by alias); 6 Aug 2007 18:37:35 -0000 Received: (qmail 20981 invoked by uid 22791); 6 Aug 2007 18:37:34 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from exprod8og51.obsmtp.com (HELO exprod8og51.obsmtp.com) (64.18.3.84) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with SMTP; Mon, 06 Aug 2007 18:37:29 +0000 Received: from source ([12.110.134.31]) by exprod8ob51.obsmtp.com ([64.18.7.12]) with SMTP; Mon, 06 Aug 2007 11:32:34 PDT Received: from pkoning.equallogic.com.equallogic.com ([172.25.202.120]) by M31.equallogic.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Mon, 6 Aug 2007 14:34:28 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <18103.27059.549214.117236@pkoning.equallogic.com> Date: Mon, 06 Aug 2007 18:37:00 -0000 From: Paul Koning To: vinod.pandarinathan@gmail.com Cc: gdb@sourceware.org Subject: Re: MIPS 64 bit addressing query References: <20070806015122.GA29212@caradoc.them.org> X-Mailer: VM 7.17 under 21.4 (patch 19) "Constant Variable" XEmacs Lucid X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2007-08/txt/msg00059.txt.bz2 >>>>> "Vinod" == Vinod pandarinathan writes: Vinod> Hi, Thanks for the quick reply. I upgraded the debugger to Vinod> gdb6.6 but still seeing the same problem. I searched the Vinod> newsgroup and found a related thread Vinod> http://www.ecos.sourceware.org/ml/gdb/2006-10/msg00088.html Vinod> I checked mips-tdep.c where the function Vinod> set_gdbarch_integer_to_address uses mips_integer_to_address Vinod> which sign extends the 32 bit value. From the above thread it Vinod> is suggested to use unsigned integer extension. However I am Vinod> still trying to find where the zero extended Vinod> address[bpt->address] is coming from. The ecos thread is for a different architecture, the SH. I don't know about that one, but the MIPS rule is entirely clear -- 32-bit addresses are sign extended, NOT zero extended, to make a 64-bit address. So if you're seeing problems because of a zero-extended address, the fix is to track down where that comes from and make it sign-extend instead. paul