From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 8355 invoked by alias); 2 Oct 2002 16:16:06 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-prs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-prs-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 8341 invoked by uid 71); 2 Oct 2002 16:16:05 -0000 Date: Wed, 02 Oct 2002 09:16:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20021002161605.8333.qmail@sources.redhat.com> To: nobody@gcc.gnu.org Cc: gcc-prs@gcc.gnu.org, From: "Adrian Bocaniciu" Subject: Re: debug/7032: arm-elf-gcc 3.1 generates wrong DWARF-2, unlike 3.0.4 Reply-To: "Adrian Bocaniciu" X-SW-Source: 2002-10/txt/msg00057.txt.bz2 List-Id: The following reply was made to PR debug/7032; it has been noted by GNATS. From: "Adrian Bocaniciu" To: , , , , , Cc: Subject: Re: debug/7032: arm-elf-gcc 3.1 generates wrong DWARF-2, unlike 3.0.4 Date: Wed, 2 Oct 2002 16:09:07 -0000 > This sounds more like a bug in AXD than in gcc. GCC is designed to work with GDB as the primary consumer of the debug information. If you want this problem to be fixed then you will have to supply details of precisely what debug information is causing the problem. Remember that most gcc developers don't have access to AXD. > You might be right, of course. However it is hard to tell because the error message from AXD was very uninformative. Still, the bug might also be in gcc, especially since it appeared after a version change. That is the reason why I reported the bug, which completely prevents the use of gcc in such an environment. Unfortunately, I did not have time to investigate the exact cause and I have rolled back to gcc 3.0.4, which works. Nonetheless, someone who knows what has changed in the DWARF generation between 3.0.4 and 3.1 (and also 3.1.1, which exhibits identical behavior) should be able to discover the origin. AXD crashed regardless of the compiled program, and the problem was located in the two sections indicated in my bug report. All these facts (changes between 3.0.4 and 3.1 in the two specified DWARF sections and independence between the crash and the code of the compiled program) should narrow enough the possible choices for the cause. When I will find some time, I will further investigate the problem. I also had problems with binutils, but there I was able to find quickly the bug and patch the binutils sources. I would rather use gdb than AXD, which is full of other bugs, but there is no way to connect gdb to my boards. The only ARM debug interfaces that gdb knows about are those from Macraigor but their support is incomplete because there is no way to define a JTAG chain with multiple devices. Therefore, until I will have time to reverse-engineer any of the existing ARM debug interfaces and add the right code to gdb, I must use AXD. And even if I do the reverse-engineering, it is probable that I will not be able to contribute the corresponding device drivers to the main distribution of gdb because of the existing abusive laws for copyright protection. Best regards !