Re: DWARF-2 and address sizes

[Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@mvista.com>]

On Sat, Feb 01, 2003 at 01:20:17AM -0500, Daniel Berlin wrote:
> 
> On Friday, January 31, 2003, at 05:36  PM, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
> 
> >On Fri, Jan 31, 2003 at 04:59:56PM -0500, Andrew Cagney wrote:
> >>>[Kevin, I noticed you doing some work in this area re S/390, maybe 
> >>>you've
> >>>got a comment?  Anyone else?  I'm grasping at straws.]
> >>>
> >>>I'm trying to figure out how to handle addresses in the DWARF 
> >>>expression
> >>>evaluator.  First consider DW_OP_deref: the following data is "the 
> >>>size of
> >>>an address on the target machine", which I would personally take to 
> >>>mean
> >>>cu_header->addr_size.  Is this ever different from 
> >>>TARGET_ADDRESS_BIT /
> >>>TARGET_CHAR_BIT, which is what Daniel was originally using?
> >>
> >>I can imagine architectures wack-o enough for cu_header->addr_size !=
> >>TARGET_ADDRESS_BIT / TARGET_CHAR_BIT.  Someone doing a 16 bit port 
> >>using
> >>32 bit elf.
> ...
> 
> >I'm willing to document this as an assertion, store the dwarf2 address
> >size and signedness somewhere global, and bail if I detect a violation.
> >But I'll skip that for now; it can be a later cleanup.  I've already
> >got too many pieces in this patch.
> >
> 
> IIRC, I did it some *other* way, and Jim told me to do it with the way 
> there now.
> Or is that the other way around (He told me to do it some other way, 
> rather than what's there now, and i never got to it).
> I believe I used to use one of the length of one of builtin types, and 
> he told me to use TARGET_ADDRESS_BIT / TARGET_CHAR_BIT.
> The archives should say.

Hmm, I didn't see it in the archives, so maybe I need to look further
back.  I'll check again.

Jim, I don't suppose you remember?

-- 
Daniel Jacobowitz
MontaVista Software                         Debian GNU/Linux Developer