From: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>
To: Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@arm.linux.org.uk>
Cc: Dmitry Eremin-Solenikov <dbaryshkov@gmail.com>,
Yao Qi <yao@codesourcery.com>, Eric Miao <eric.y.miao@gmail.com>,
"linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
"gdb@sourceware.org" <gdb@sourceware.org>
Subject: Re: Problem with GDB when debugging IRQ handlers
Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2011 14:42:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20110628144202.GC24904@e102109-lin.cambridge.arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20110628143758.GF21898@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk>
On Tue, Jun 28, 2011 at 03:37:59PM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 28, 2011 at 03:30:14PM +0100, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> > Actually since the return address is in S_PC (which maybe gdb assumes it
> > would be the saved LR), this is probably not be correct. After SVC
> > entry, we have he following structure on the stack:
> >
> > ORIG_r0
> > CPSR
> > <--- assuming this is the Call Frame Address (SP+S_PC+4)
> > PC <--- CFA - 4
> > LR <--- don't care
> > SP <--- CFA - 12
> > ...
>
> If I'm reading this correctly, it's not correct.
>
> parent SP --> parent context stack
> [possible empty word]
> ORIG_r0
> parent context CPSR
> parent context PC
> parent context LR
> parent context SP
> ...
> new SP --> R0
>
> That empty word may or may not be present if the parent SP is aligned to
> a 64-bit boundary.
But it shouldn't matter if we tell gdb that the previous SP (parent) is
stored in the current stack at CFA - 12. It calculates CFA by adding
S_PC+4 to the current SP, in which case the possible empty word doesn't
matter.
But please note that I don't have any gdb experience, so we need someone
else to confirm.
--
Catalin
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-06-28 14:42 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <20110627125306.GA30646@doriath.ww600.siemens.net>
[not found] ` <20110627132735.GE16103@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk>
2011-06-27 14:04 ` Dmitry Eremin-Solenikov
2011-06-27 14:12 ` Hui Zhu
2011-06-27 14:59 ` Yao Qi
2011-06-28 10:40 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2011-06-28 12:06 ` Dmitry Eremin-Solenikov
2011-06-28 12:14 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2011-06-28 14:19 ` Catalin Marinas
2011-06-28 14:29 ` Catalin Marinas
2011-06-28 14:38 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2011-06-28 14:42 ` Catalin Marinas [this message]
2011-06-28 14:44 ` Dmitry Eremin-Solenikov
2011-06-28 14:58 ` Dmitry Eremin-Solenikov
2011-06-28 15:06 ` Catalin Marinas
2011-06-28 15:46 ` Dmitry Eremin-Solenikov
2011-06-28 16:11 ` Catalin Marinas
2011-06-28 22:26 ` Dmitry Eremin-Solenikov
2011-06-29 9:10 ` Catalin Marinas
2011-06-29 11:21 ` Dmitry Eremin-Solenikov
2011-06-28 12:07 ` Hui Zhu
2011-06-28 12:09 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2011-06-28 13:22 ` Catalin Marinas
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20110628144202.GC24904@e102109-lin.cambridge.arm.com \
--to=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=dbaryshkov@gmail.com \
--cc=eric.y.miao@gmail.com \
--cc=gdb@sourceware.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux@arm.linux.org.uk \
--cc=yao@codesourcery.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox