From: Andrew Cagney <ac131313@redhat.com>
To: Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@mvista.com>
Cc: gdb@sources.redhat.com, Jim Blandy <jimb@redhat.com>,
Kevin Buettner <kevinb@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: DWARF-2 and address sizes
Date: Sat, 01 Feb 2003 07:29:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <3E3B7733.8070201@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20030131223639.GA3585@nevyn.them.org>
> On Fri, Jan 31, 2003 at 04:59:56PM -0500, Andrew Cagney wrote:
>
>> >[Kevin, I noticed you doing some work in this area re S/390, maybe you've
>> >got a comment? Anyone else? I'm grasping at straws.]
>> >
>> >I'm trying to figure out how to handle addresses in the DWARF expression
>> >evaluator. First consider DW_OP_deref: the following data is "the size of
>> >an address on the target machine", which I would personally take to mean
>> >cu_header->addr_size. Is this ever different from TARGET_ADDRESS_BIT /
>> >TARGET_CHAR_BIT, which is what Daniel was originally using?
>
>>
>> I can imagine architectures wack-o enough for cu_header->addr_size !=
>> TARGET_ADDRESS_BIT / TARGET_CHAR_BIT. Someone doing a 16 bit port using
>> 32 bit elf.
>
>
> I wonder if MIPS64 Linux kernels do this, since they're technically
> ELF32? Hmm, probably not.
Well, for ages elf32 was being used in MIPS64 with a 64 bit pointer.
>> >If the consensus is "no, that's too stupid to be allowed to live", then
>> >this
>> >gets much easier.
>> >
>> >(Then consider DW_OP_deref_size; this is a fun one, since it has to be
>> >zero-extended to the size of an address on the target machine according to
>> >the spec, and then in GDB it may have to be zero or sign extended to the
>> >size of a CORE_ADDR for storage. I haven't tested any of this on MIPS yet
>> >and I don't want to, damn it. I don't know of any MIPS ABI with multiple
>> >pointer sizes, and you can't link different ABIs, so encountering
>> >DW_OP_deref_size is probably impossible. I hope.)
>
>>
>> Have a look at dwarf2read.c:read_address() the existing code already
>> handles one case of this.
>
>
> Yes. I don't know if it sign extends properly in all cases - I guess
> it does if signed_address_p always matches whether a CORE_ADDR is a
> signed type, but that's dubious.
It sign extends sufficiently properly/often for it to at least appear to
work. Vis MIPS with 64 bit CORE_ADDR and registers but elf32.
Andrew
prev parent reply other threads:[~2003-02-01 7:29 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2003-01-31 21:29 Daniel Jacobowitz
2003-01-31 22:00 ` Andrew Cagney
2003-01-31 22:36 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2003-02-01 6:20 ` Daniel Berlin
2003-02-01 17:01 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2003-02-04 2:26 ` Jim Blandy
2003-02-01 7:29 ` Andrew Cagney [this message]
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=3E3B7733.8070201@redhat.com \
--to=ac131313@redhat.com \
--cc=drow@mvista.com \
--cc=gdb@sources.redhat.com \
--cc=jimb@redhat.com \
--cc=kevinb@redhat.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