From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 15336 invoked by alias); 25 Sep 2007 16:03:46 -0000 Received: (qmail 15328 invoked by uid 22791); 25 Sep 2007 16:03:45 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from NaN.false.org (HELO nan.false.org) (208.75.86.248) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Tue, 25 Sep 2007 16:03:40 +0000 Received: from nan.false.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by nan.false.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9D583982AD; Tue, 25 Sep 2007 16:03:38 +0000 (GMT) Received: from caradoc.them.org (22.svnf5.xdsl.nauticom.net [209.195.183.55]) by nan.false.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7EF08980BD; Tue, 25 Sep 2007 16:03:38 +0000 (GMT) Received: from drow by caradoc.them.org with local (Exim 4.67) (envelope-from ) id 1IaCsr-00039E-R1; Tue, 25 Sep 2007 12:03:37 -0400 Date: Tue, 25 Sep 2007 16:31:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: The Westlakers Cc: gdb@sourceware.org Subject: Re: question about GDB message Message-ID: <20070925160337.GA12085@caradoc.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: The Westlakers , gdb@sourceware.org References: <6b14b5b00709242126n5321100m2aad74fd7c7ea58d@mail.gmail.com> <6b14b5b00709242128y54e97509t1c2330a6fc3fa0b@mail.gmail.com> <20070925110500.GA29300@caradoc.them.org> <6b14b5b00709250441v6e04f36bm1553dc901ecb6e17@mail.gmail.com> <20070925114838.GA31304@caradoc.them.org> <6b14b5b00709250527u3df06e1cped38587bf2edd8d@mail.gmail.com> <20070925123516.GA1733@caradoc.them.org> <6b14b5b00709250857n5e89f833i5058e77cb7cb1534@mail.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <6b14b5b00709250857n5e89f833i5058e77cb7cb1534@mail.gmail.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.15 (2007-04-09) 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: 2007-09/txt/msg00205.txt.bz2 On Tue, Sep 25, 2007 at 08:57:47AM -0700, The Westlakers wrote: > > That's right. It shouldn't matter that the GDB is 32-bit. What goes > > wrong talking to a 64-bit target? > > when GDB issues 'g' packet to the target, the target returns all reg > values in 64-bit, > but the GDB interprets it as 32-bit, so 'info reg' will not show > correct register values. > if the target returns in 32-bit values, then info reg can display all > values correctly. Did you load a 64-bit file into GDB so that it knows you are debugging a 64-bit image? -- Daniel Jacobowitz CodeSourcery