From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <binutils-return-41400-listarch-binutils=sources.redhat.com@sources.redhat.com>
Received: (qmail 13746 invoked by alias); 15 Jun 2005 15:31:23 -0000
Mailing-List: contact binutils-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Subscribe: <mailto:binutils-subscribe@sources.redhat.com>
List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/binutils/>
List-Post: <mailto:binutils@sources.redhat.com>
List-Help: <mailto:binutils-help@sources.redhat.com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender: binutils-owner@sources.redhat.com
Received: (qmail 13727 invoked by uid 22791); 15 Jun 2005 15:31:19 -0000
Received: from lyle.provo.novell.com (HELO lyle.provo.novell.com) (137.65.81.174)
    by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.30-dev) with ESMTP; Wed, 15 Jun 2005 15:31:19 +0000
Received: from INET-PRV3-MTA by lyle.provo.novell.com
	with Novell_GroupWise; Wed, 15 Jun 2005 09:29:58 -0600
Message-Id: <s2aff516.092@lyle.provo.novell.com>
Date: Wed, 15 Jun 2005 15:31:00 -0000
From: "Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@novell.com>
To: <wilson@specifixinc.com>
Cc: <cary@cup.hp.com>,<david_mosberger@hp.com>,
	<binutils@sources.redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ia64: unwind directive handling
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline
X-SW-Source: 2005-06/txt/msg00414.txt.bz2

So Jim, should I remove .vframepsp altogether in the to-be-updated the patc=
h? Jan

>>> "Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@novell.com> 13.06.05 09:06:52 >>>
>>> Cary Coutant <cary@cup.hp.com> 10.06.05 23:52:01 >>>
>> I checked the SCRA.  Appendix B constains tables listing all of the=20
>> valid
>> unwind encodings.  This does not include psp_psprel.  I see that it=20
>> comes
>> from the .vframepsp directive.  Curiously, the asm language manual has=20
>> two
>> typos in the vframepsp docs.  It emits two unwind records, and both of=20
>> them
>> are mispelled.  Maybe this is a late change that was never properly=20
>> documented.
>> How do you know that P8 r=3D0 is correct?
>
>Jim is right -- there is no psp_psprel unwind directive, and Format P8,=20
>r=3D0 is unassigned.

As I said, ias uses this, so it can't be completely invalid.

>If you think about it, storing the previous stack pointer at a location=20
>relative to psp is pointless at best, since you would need to know the=20
>psp in order to recover the psp!

Hmm, indeed. This, however, still doesn't mean no change is needed; .vframe=
psp itself is pointless, then, and support for it should be removed.

Jan