From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 4596 invoked by alias); 27 Nov 2005 15:07:48 -0000 Received: (qmail 4587 invoked by uid 22791); 27 Nov 2005 15:07:47 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from ip127.bb146.pacific.net.hk (HELO stl.com.hk) (202.64.146.127) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Sun, 27 Nov 2005 15:07:45 +0000 Received: from 221.196.17.210.dyn.pacific.net.hk ([210.17.196.221] helo=[192.168.1.10]) by stl.com.hk with esmtpsa (TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA:32) (Exim 4.50) id 1EgO20-0004kA-BS; Sun, 27 Nov 2005 23:01:32 +0800 Message-ID: <4389CBA4.6010906@tausq.org> Date: Sun, 27 Nov 2005 15:10:00 -0000 From: Randolph Chung User-Agent: Debian Thunderbird 1.0.2 (X11/20050331) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: John David Anglin CC: Mark Kettenis , gdb@sources.redhat.com, brobecker@adacore.com Subject: Re: Register numbers on hppa64 References: <200511261849.jAQInvcq019702@hiauly1.hia.nrc.ca> In-Reply-To: <200511261849.jAQInvcq019702@hiauly1.hia.nrc.ca> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2005-11/txt/msg00592.txt.bz2 > If we change the register use in .dwarf_frame, then we are breaking > compatibility with previously compiled code. This isn't a big deal > under HP-UX (dwarf debugging was totally broken on hppa64 until a > recent assembler fix). However, there is a fair bit of installed > code running linux. Thus, I would say not change the status quo > if the above confusion can be handled. The actual numbers used for > the FP registers are obscure and I doubt many people actually care > what they are. It's only people maintaining the dwarf code that > are likely to get confused. If readelf produced a text rather than > numeric representation, then the problem would largely go away. If I understand Mark correctly, the suggestion would change the numbering used for dwarf cfi/eh, but not the register numbers emitted for .debug_info, right? FWIW currently on hppa-linux, gdb does not use dwarf cfi for frame unwinding. It's on my list of things to do, but if something need changing in gcc for whatever reason, now is a good time to do it as far as I'm concerned. randolph