From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 20087 invoked by alias); 14 Nov 2011 05:14:55 -0000 Received: (qmail 20069 invoked by uid 22791); 14 Nov 2011 05:14:53 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.2 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mail-bw0-f41.google.com (HELO mail-bw0-f41.google.com) (209.85.214.41) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Mon, 14 Nov 2011 05:14:40 +0000 Received: by bke17 with SMTP id 17so5206599bke.0 for ; Sun, 13 Nov 2011 21:14:38 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.204.9.206 with SMTP id m14mr5974764bkm.126.1321247678732; Sun, 13 Nov 2011 21:14:38 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.204.59.212 with HTTP; Sun, 13 Nov 2011 21:14:38 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Mon, 14 Nov 2011 05:14:00 -0000 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Issue with GDB 7.0 on MIPS(gcc 4.4.1) From: naveen yadav To: Ian Lance Taylor Cc: gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org, gdb@sourceware.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2011-11/txt/msg00090.txt.bz2 Hi Ian, My GCC version 4.4.1. and here is source code. http://gingacdn.lavid.ufpb.br/projects/ginga-j/repository/revisions/7e233c1= 906624b0e01698415987aada3fd8c3fe4/entry/gingaj/jvm/src/share/javavm/runtime= /gc/generational/gen_markcompact.c and here is backtrace. mips-gdb> bt sweep (gen=3D0x5d5f508, ee=3D0x5c4300d0, numBytes=3D4294967295, gcOpts=3D0x5c3408f8) #1 CVMgenMarkCompactCollect (gen=3D0x5d5f508, ee=3D0x5c4300d0, numBytes=3D4294967295, gcOpts=3D0x5c3408f8) ...... If you need more detail pls let me know.. Thanks. On Fri, Nov 11, 2011 at 10:01 PM, Ian Lance Taylor wrote: > naveen yadav writes: > >> I am running one application and it generate core dump. When I run bt . >> (gdb) bt >> #0 =A0sweep (gn=3D0x5d5f58, ef=3D0x5c43000, Bytes=3D429496729, gcOs=3D0x= 5c3408f) >> #1 =A0CompactCollect (gn=3D0x5d5f58, ef=3D0x5c43000, Bytes=3D429496729, = gcOs=3D0x5c3408f) >> ... >> >> In above case >> we got crash in wepp(). >> CompactCollect () is main function and wepp() is another function >> which got called from CompactCollect (). >> >> When I check the assembly wepp() become inline. >> So i got bit surprise when i check that function parameter;s for both >> wepp() and CompactCollect () are same. >> >> So is it correct behaviour ? that calling and calle have same parameter > > Without any information about the source code, I don't see how we can > tell whether having the same parameters is correct behaviour or not. > > That said, it is certainly possible that the arguments of the inlined > function are not being displayed correctly. =A0Mainline gcc has gotten > quite a bit better about debug info for inlined functions and in general > for avoiding incorrect display of variables in optimized code. > > Ian >