From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 22862 invoked by alias); 2 Nov 2009 15:48:49 -0000 Received: (qmail 22844 invoked by uid 22791); 2 Nov 2009 15:48:47 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.5 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from rock.gnat.com (HELO rock.gnat.com) (205.232.38.15) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Mon, 02 Nov 2009 15:48:43 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by filtered-rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8B4402BAB9C; Mon, 2 Nov 2009 10:48:41 -0500 (EST) Received: from rock.gnat.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (rock.gnat.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id 6Z-O4SYsQbpy; Mon, 2 Nov 2009 10:48:41 -0500 (EST) Received: from joel.gnat.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 572BD2BAAB2; Mon, 2 Nov 2009 10:48:41 -0500 (EST) Received: by joel.gnat.com (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 837A1F5905; Mon, 2 Nov 2009 07:48:36 -0800 (PST) Date: Mon, 02 Nov 2009 15:48:00 -0000 From: Joel Brobecker To: Tristan Gingold Cc: gdb@sourceware.org Subject: Re: Help: address vs pointer Message-ID: <20091102154836.GG4573@adacore.com> References: <26EF10E2-E2F3-4822-9CD6-4B90CF7B2CE3@adacore.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <26EF10E2-E2F3-4822-9CD6-4B90CF7B2CE3@adacore.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) 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: 2009-11/txt/msg00008.txt.bz2 > So what should be the type of the pc register ? If it is a pointer to > instructions, 'print $pc' would be wrong as it would be multiplied by > 4 (once by read_pc and once during evaluation). My not-so-educated feeling on this issue is that PC should be a pointer to instruction. What seems strange is that the PC value gets doubled twice. I understand why during the read, but not why during the eval. Perhaps there is something we can do there? -- Joel