From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 21615 invoked by alias); 23 Aug 2004 17:14:31 -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 21605 invoked from network); 23 Aug 2004 17:14:30 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (66.187.233.31) by sourceware.org with SMTP; 23 Aug 2004 17:14:30 -0000 Received: from int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (int-mx1.corp.redhat.com [172.16.52.254]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i7NHEUe3011834 for ; Mon, 23 Aug 2004 13:14:30 -0400 Received: from localhost.redhat.com (porkchop.devel.redhat.com [172.16.58.2]) by int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id i7NHETa26034; Mon, 23 Aug 2004 13:14:29 -0400 Received: from gnu.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8863A2B9D; Mon, 23 Aug 2004 13:13:21 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <412A25B1.7080308@gnu.org> Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 17:14:00 -0000 From: Andrew Cagney User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; NetBSD macppc; en-GB; rv:1.4.1) Gecko/20040801 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: David Daney Cc: gdb@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: Unable to step over (n and ni) on mipsel-linux... References: <412649F4.9040002@avtrex.com> In-Reply-To: <412649F4.9040002@avtrex.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2004-08/txt/msg00285.txt.bz2 > GNU gdb 6.2_2004-08-19-cvs > > from the gdb_6_2-branch yesterday. > > ../gdbcvs/src/configure --build=i686-pc-linux --host=mipsel-linux > --target=mipsel-linux --enable-tui=no > > Most of the time when I do next or nexti, gdb is treating it as if I did > step or stepi. > > I have tracked the problem down to this portion of code: Sounds like a bug in the MIPS unwind code. Can you build/test with mainline (the fixes won't be backported). The problem is that, after the step-into the callee, the MIPS unwind code is not correctly unwinding back to the caller's frame-ID. As Theodore notes, this is very compiler dependant. Andrew > infrun.c: 2322 > . > . > . > if (frame_id_eq (frame_unwind_id (get_current_frame ()), > step_frame_id)) > { > /* It's a subroutine call. */ > CORE_ADDR real_stop_pc; > . > . > . > > When there is a subroutine call this if statement fails. It never > thinks "It's a subroutine call." > > Something is horked up in the frame code, but I cannot figure out where. > > David Daney. > > >