From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 16460 invoked by alias); 6 Feb 2003 14:30:04 -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 16452 invoked from network); 6 Feb 2003 14:30:03 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO kerberos.suse.cz) (195.47.106.10) by 172.16.49.205 with SMTP; 6 Feb 2003 14:30:03 -0000 Received: from chimera.suse.cz (chimera.suse.cz [10.20.0.2]) by kerberos.suse.cz (SuSE SMTP server) with ESMTP id ED9D959D33A; Thu, 6 Feb 2003 15:30:01 +0100 (CET) Received: from suse.cz (naga.suse.cz [10.20.1.16]) by chimera.suse.cz (8.11.0/8.11.0/SuSE Linux 8.11.0-0.4) with ESMTP id h16EU1424164; Thu, 6 Feb 2003 15:30:01 +0100 X-Authentication-Warning: chimera.suse.cz: Host naga.suse.cz [10.20.1.16] claimed to be suse.cz Message-ID: <3E427169.5010702@suse.cz> Date: Thu, 06 Feb 2003 14:30:00 -0000 From: Michal Ludvig Organization: SuSE CR User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.2.1) Gecko/20021130 X-Accept-Language: cs, cz, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: gdb@sources.redhat.com Cc: Andrew Cagney , Michael Elizabeth Chastain , Mark Kettenis Subject: regcache (Re: GDB respin) References: <200302031615.h13GFVP26477@duracef.shout.net> <3E3EA35D.3080300@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <3E3EA35D.3080300@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2003-02/txt/msg00123.txt.bz2 Andrew Cagney wrote: > Can someone post backtraces? > > 49 gdb.log:../../gdb-head/gdb/sentinel-frame.c:102: > internal-error: Function sentinal_frame_pop called > > Er, this should shouldn't happen. Backtrace? > > 3 gdb.log:../../gdb-head/gdb/regcache.c:713: internal-error: > regcache_raw_read: Assertion `regcache != NULL && buf != NULL' failed. > > Again, the caller is pretty messed up. > > 5 gdb.log:../../gdb-head/gdb/gdbarch.c:4271: internal-error: > gdbarch: gdbarch_store_return_value invalid > 2 gdb.log:&"../../gdb-head/gdb/gdbarch.c:4252: internal-error: > gdbarch: gdbarch_extract_return_value invalid\n" > 6 gdb.log:../../gdb-head/gdb/gdbarch.c:4252: internal-error: > gdbarch: gdbarch_extract_return_value invalid The problem on x86-64 is probably caused by the regbuf vs. regcache usage. This is a part of the patch that broke the testsuite: diff -u -p -r1.33 -r1.34 --- gdb/x86-64-tdep.c 26 Oct 2002 10:37:45 -0000 1.33 +++ gdb/x86-64-tdep.c 26 Oct 2002 16:56:34 -0000 1.34 @@ -925,11 +925,35 @@ x86_64_init_abi (struct gdbarch_info inf + set_gdbarch_long_double_bit (gdbarch, 128); + set_gdbarch_ps_regnum (gdbarch, 17); /* %eflags */ + set_gdbarch_stab_reg_to_regnum (gdbarch, x86_64_dwarf2_reg_to_regnum); + set_gdbarch_dwarf_reg_to_regnum (gdbarch, x86_64_dwarf2_reg_to_regnum); + set_gdbarch_extract_return_value (gdbarch, NULL); + set_gdbarch_store_return_value (gdbarch, NULL); + set_gdbarch_extract_struct_value_address (gdbarch, NULL); If I comment out last three lines (those return_value related), the testsuite performs much better. But all the other lines seem have some influence on the results. I'm about to convert x86-64 target to use regcache, but am not sure what must be done for it. Could someone please briefly explain me what is regcache all about and what must be changed in order to have the target regcache-compilant? As I was looking to the sources I believe, that only x86_64_store_return_value() and x86_64_extract_return_value() must be modified. Am I right or not? Thanks. Michal Ludvig -- * SuSE CR, s.r.o * mludvig@suse.cz * (+420) 296.545.373 * http://www.suse.cz