From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 22024 invoked by alias); 21 Nov 2002 10:58:52 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 21818 invoked from network); 21 Nov 2002 10:58:47 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO fw-cam.cambridge.arm.com) (193.131.176.3) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 21 Nov 2002 10:58:47 -0000 Received: by fw-cam.cambridge.arm.com; id KAA29659; Thu, 21 Nov 2002 10:58:39 GMT Received: from unknown(172.16.1.2) by fw-cam.cambridge.arm.com via smap (V5.5) id xmaa29313; Thu, 21 Nov 02 10:58:11 GMT Received: from pc960.cambridge.arm.com (pc960.cambridge.arm.com [10.1.205.4]) by cam-admin0.cambridge.arm.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id KAA27058; Thu, 21 Nov 2002 10:58:10 GMT Received: from pc960.cambridge.arm.com (rearnsha@localhost) by pc960.cambridge.arm.com (8.11.6/8.9.3) with ESMTP id gALAwAB03462; Thu, 21 Nov 2002 10:58:10 GMT Message-Id: <200211211058.gALAwAB03462@pc960.cambridge.arm.com> X-Authentication-Warning: pc960.cambridge.arm.com: rearnsha owned process doing -bs To: "Kris Warkentin" cc: Richard.Earnshaw@arm.com, gdb@sources.redhat.com Reply-To: Richard.Earnshaw@arm.com Organization: ARM Ltd. X-Telephone: +44 1223 400569 (direct+voicemail), +44 1223 400400 (switchbd) X-Fax: +44 1223 400410 X-Address: ARM Ltd., 110 Fulbourn Road, Cherry Hinton, Cambridge CB1 9NJ. Subject: Re: ARM stack alignment on hand called functions In-reply-to: Your message of "Wed, 20 Nov 2002 14:40:18 EST." <1a2a01c290cc$aa02bef0$0202040a@catdog> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Thu, 21 Nov 2002 02:58:00 -0000 From: Richard Earnshaw X-SW-Source: 2002-11/txt/msg00313.txt.bz2 > > > OK, but with this change the alignment is being done *after* any > arguments > > > that have to go onto the stack have been pushed. It should happen > > > *before*. What happens if you have? > > You're right. If I put the "sp = (sp + 3) & ~3" at the top of > arm_push_arguments(), everything works. I see that a lot of stuff in > arm-tdep.c has been changed extensively on your head branch, including > arm_push_arguments(). Probably once we move to the head branch, everything > will work fine. > Don't forget that the stack is a "full-descending" stack; so you should be rounding the value down, not up. R.