From: Corinna Vinschen <vinschen@redhat.com>
To: gdb-patches@sourceware.org
Subject: Re: [rfa] frame address size incorrect if address size != ptr size
Date: Thu, 05 Aug 2010 14:30:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100805143039.GF4610@calimero.vinschen.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <201008051407.o75E7jDO011061@d12av02.megacenter.de.ibm.com>
On Aug 5 16:07, Ulrich Weigand wrote:
> Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> > [...]
> > If not, I would prefer a solution like this:
> >
> > - If version > 4, use addr_size from .debug_frame section
> > - Otherwise, if we can fetch the target address size from the CU
> > header, use it.
> > - Otherwise, if the target defined gdbarch_dwarf2_addr_size, use it.
> > - Otherwise, default to gdbarch_addr_bit for .debug_frame sections
> > and to gdbarch_ptr_bit for .eh_frame sections.
>
> As I said, finding the .debug_info may be difficult. Also, I'd really
> avoid getting another dependency on gdbarch_addr_bit in there; the point
> of having a new callback is exactly to avoid overloading addr_bit with
> more and more (possibly) different meanings.
>
> I'd rather just have gdbarch_dwarf2_addr_size default unconditionally
> to gdbarch_ptr_bit. In dwarf2-frame we'd then simply use the embedded
> addr_size if version >= 4, and gdbarch_dwarf2_addr_size otherwise.
> Platforms where ptr_bit is not appropriate simply need to define
> gdbarch_dwarf2_addr_size -- since this list is very short, and defining
> gdbarch_dwarf2_addr_size correctly is very simple (you just need to look
> at the definition of DWARF2_ADDR_SIZE in the corresponding GCC back-end),
> that doesn't seem like an unreasonable restriction to me ...
>
> > > As a side note, it seems odd that add_size is set in those two
> > > different locations here. The first one is always overwritten
> > > by the second one anyway, isn't it?
> >
> > There's an early return statement after checking the version number.
> > That indicates a failure anyway, so it might be ok to set addr_size
> > only once, at the second spot (lines 1779ff).
>
> Yes, that sounds right to me.
Ok, I agree with all you say above.
I'm going to create a patch which defines and uses a new
gdbarch_dwarf2_addr_size function. It will be defined as a variable
like this in gdbarch.sh:
v:int:dwarf2_addr_size:::sizeof (void*):0:gdbarch_ptr_bit (gdbarch) / TARGET_CHAR_BIT:
Given that, and also given that I will remove the redundant setting of
cie->addr_size in decode_frame_entry_1, I have one question left.
What about that comment in decode_frame_entry_1?
If we only use either the V4 addr_size, or the gdbarch_dwarf2_addr_size
function, then the comment really doesn't make much sense anymore in that
spot. I'm wondering if it should be moved to the gdbarch.sh file. What
do you think?
Corinna
--
Corinna Vinschen
Cygwin Project Co-Leader
Red Hat
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-08-05 14:30 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-07-26 14:53 Corinna Vinschen
2010-08-04 11:35 ` Corinna Vinschen
2010-08-04 22:40 ` Jan Kratochvil
2010-08-05 8:06 ` Corinna Vinschen
2010-08-05 10:04 ` Ulrich Weigand
2010-08-05 12:30 ` Corinna Vinschen
2010-08-05 14:08 ` Ulrich Weigand
2010-08-05 14:30 ` Corinna Vinschen [this message]
2010-08-05 14:59 ` Ulrich Weigand
2010-08-05 15:30 ` Corinna Vinschen
2010-08-05 16:52 ` Ulrich Weigand
2010-08-06 10:48 ` Corinna Vinschen
2010-08-06 11:17 ` Mark Kettenis
2010-08-06 12:01 ` Corinna Vinschen
2010-08-06 14:51 ` Ulrich Weigand
2010-08-06 15:57 ` Corinna Vinschen
2010-08-06 16:27 ` Ulrich Weigand
2010-08-06 16:59 ` Corinna Vinschen
2010-08-06 19:03 ` Corinna Vinschen
2010-08-08 14:55 ` Ulrich Weigand
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20100805143039.GF4610@calimero.vinschen.de \
--to=vinschen@redhat.com \
--cc=gdb-patches@sourceware.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).