From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 6007 invoked by alias); 15 Apr 2002 13:42:41 -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 5996 invoked from network); 15 Apr 2002 13:42:40 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO localhost.redhat.com) (24.112.240.27) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 15 Apr 2002 13:42:40 -0000 Received: from cygnus.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 919043CFD; Mon, 15 Apr 2002 09:42:45 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <3CBAD8D5.4030605@cygnus.com> Date: Mon, 15 Apr 2002 06:42:00 -0000 From: Andrew Cagney User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; NetBSD macppc; en-US; rv:0.9.9) Gecko/20020328 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Peter.Schauer" Cc: gdb@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: Switch ARM, SPARC and i386 to generic dummy frames (PC_IN_CALL_DUMMY)? References: <200204150751.JAA01272@reisser.regent.e-technik.tu-muenchen.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2002-04/txt/msg00251.txt.bz2 > AFAIK, generic dummy frames work only with the AT_ENTRY mechanism. > > But for 32 bit SPARC ABI we need ON_STACK, see > http://sourceware.cygnus.com/ml/gdb/1999-q4/msg00064.html > http://sources.redhat.com/ml/gdb-patches/2000-05/msg00041.html > for an explanation. > > I am afraid that we have to extend the generic dummy frame code to allow > ON_STACK, i I've this feeling that I might have just (accidently!) done this. For sparc, the problem may be more the register window gunk. Andrew