From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 6261 invoked by alias); 5 Aug 2003 21:50:29 -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 6236 invoked from network); 5 Aug 2003 21:50:24 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.inka.de) (193.197.184.2) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 5 Aug 2003 21:50:24 -0000 Received: from raven.inka.de (uucp@[127.0.0.1]) by mail.inka.de with uucp (rmailwrap 0.5) id 19k9hI-0003kw-00; Tue, 05 Aug 2003 23:50:24 +0200 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by raven.inka.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6EF8A1CC for ; Tue, 5 Aug 2003 23:49:43 +0200 (CEST) Received: by raven.inka.de (Postfix, from userid 500) id 7E9CA1CE; Tue, 5 Aug 2003 23:49:38 +0200 (CEST) Date: Tue, 05 Aug 2003 21:50:00 -0000 From: Josef Wolf To: gdb@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: Need Help for bringing m68k-based bdm target-patches form gdb-5.2.1 to gdb-5.3 Message-ID: <20030805214938.GA26288@raven.inka.de> References: <20030731223514.GD20282@raven.inka.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20030731223514.GD20282@raven.inka.de> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i X-Virus-Scanned: by AMaViS snapshot-20020531 X-SW-Source: 2003-08/txt/msg00072.txt.bz2 Hello! On Fri, Aug 01, 2003 at 12:35:14AM +0200, Josef Wolf wrote: Could it be that noone have noticed my first mail? IMHO, at least this: [ ... ] > The relevant change was that default_get_saved_register() was deleted > and replaced with generic_unwind_get_saved_register() > > The problem with this replacement was that default_get_saved_register() > semantically did > > if (frame==NULL) > *addrp=REGISTER_BYTE(regnum); > > while generic_unwind_get_saved_register() semantically did > > if (frame==NULL) > *addrp=0; > > This confused value_of_register() because it stores this address into > the value struct, so that callers can calculate the register number from > this address. This results in clobbering of all the register contents of > the target because everything seemed to be in register 0. seems to be a bug in gdb. And this bug is still present in gdb-5.3. Maybe one of the gdb-gurus could clarify this? -- Please visit and sign http://petition-eurolinux.org and http://www.ffii.org -- Josef Wolf -- jw@raven.inka.de --