From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 10399 invoked by alias); 1 Apr 2009 20:20:06 -0000 Received: (qmail 10389 invoked by uid 22791); 1 Apr 2009 20:20:05 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.5 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from NaN.false.org (HELO nan.false.org) (208.75.86.248) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Wed, 01 Apr 2009 20:19:56 +0000 Received: from nan.false.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by nan.false.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 301CB106A9; Wed, 1 Apr 2009 20:19:54 +0000 (GMT) Received: from caradoc.them.org (209.195.188.212.nauticom.net [209.195.188.212]) by nan.false.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 08A67105BB; Wed, 1 Apr 2009 20:19:54 +0000 (GMT) Received: from drow by caradoc.them.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Lp6uf-0005zX-0s; Wed, 01 Apr 2009 16:19:53 -0400 Date: Wed, 01 Apr 2009 20:20:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: Jonas Maebe Cc: gdb@sourceware.org Subject: Re: Skipping over trampolines/stubs Message-ID: <20090401201952.GA22834@caradoc.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: Jonas Maebe , gdb@sourceware.org References: <4B835C7C-B28E-4552-87E0-25D803741FA3@elis.ugent.be> <20090401191446.GA18926@caradoc.them.org> <83CD35E6-FDD6-4A4B-A5E2-14AC30D609DA@elis.ugent.be> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <83CD35E6-FDD6-4A4B-A5E2-14AC30D609DA@elis.ugent.be> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2008-05-11) 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: 2009-04/txt/msg00012.txt.bz2 On Wed, Apr 01, 2009 at 10:15:33PM +0200, Jonas Maebe wrote: > Thanks. Given that tracing some of these stubs requires access to the > parameters, I should start with adding support for the Borland fastcall > calling convention to gdb. The reason is that this is our default calling > convention on i386 platforms, mainly for Delphi compatibility reasons > (quite a bit of unparametrised assembler code there). > > Which brings me to the next point: how does one go about "allocating" a > new DW_AT_calling_convention value in the DW_CC_lo_user .. DW_CC_hi_user > range? At first sight, there is only one such value currently in public > use (DW_CC_GNU_renesas_sh). Can I just take 0x41 for > DW_CC_BORLAND_fastcall_i386? And should I then submit this constant for > inclusion in binutils first? I don't know - might want to raise this on the DWARF discussion list (see dwarfstd.org). -- Daniel Jacobowitz CodeSourcery