From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 2878 invoked by alias); 10 Jan 2014 14:30:57 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 2799 invoked by uid 89); 10 Jan 2014 14:30:56 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-2.6 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RP_MATCHES_RCVD autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 X-HELO: e06smtp10.uk.ibm.com Received: from e06smtp10.uk.ibm.com (HELO e06smtp10.uk.ibm.com) (195.75.94.106) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with (AES256-SHA encrypted) ESMTPS; Fri, 10 Jan 2014 14:30:55 +0000 Received: from /spool/local by e06smtp10.uk.ibm.com with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted for from ; Fri, 10 Jan 2014 14:30:52 -0000 Received: from d06dlp02.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (9.149.20.14) by e06smtp10.uk.ibm.com (192.168.101.140) with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted; Fri, 10 Jan 2014 14:30:49 -0000 Received: from b06cxnps3074.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (d06relay09.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com [9.149.109.194]) by d06dlp02.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B53BE2190061 for ; Fri, 10 Jan 2014 14:30:47 +0000 (GMT) Received: from d06av12.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (d06av12.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com [9.149.37.247]) by b06cxnps3074.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id s0AEUabZ62390412 for ; Fri, 10 Jan 2014 14:30:36 GMT Received: from d06av12.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by d06av12.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (8.14.4/8.14.4/NCO v10.0 AVout) with ESMTP id s0AEUlje026443 for ; Fri, 10 Jan 2014 07:30:48 -0700 Received: from br87z6lw.de.ibm.com (dyn-9-152-212-219.boeblingen.de.ibm.com [9.152.212.219]) by d06av12.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (8.14.4/8.14.4/NCO v10.0 AVin) with ESMTP id s0AEUjBj026385; Fri, 10 Jan 2014 07:30:46 -0700 From: Andreas Arnez To: Pedro Alves Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org, Ulrich Weigand , Andreas Krebbel , jan.kratochvil@redhat.com Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix possible alignment issue with dw2-dir-file-name test case References: <87a9f65p73.fsf@br87z6lw.de.ibm.com> <52CFD97A.4040009@redhat.com> Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2014 14:30:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: <52CFD97A.4040009@redhat.com> (Pedro Alves's message of "Fri, 10 Jan 2014 11:28:58 +0000") Message-ID: <87mwj352p5.fsf@br87z6lw.de.ibm.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.3 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-TM-AS-MML: disable X-Content-Scanned: Fidelis XPS MAILER x-cbid: 14011014-4966-0000-0000-00000809990C X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2014-01/txt/msg00279.txt.bz2 On Fri, Jan 10 2014, Pedro Alves wrote: > On 01/08/2014 06:00 PM, Andreas Arnez wrote: >> Since upstream gcc has recently increased the function alignment on >> S390, the dw2-dir-file-name test case fails in the first >> gdb_continue_to_breakpoint. Indeed, the breakpoint is now placed into >> the alignment gap *before* the actual function. >> >> This happens because the test case declares the respective "*_start" >> symbol as a "loose" label before the function definition, and the >> compiler inserts the alignment between that label and the function >> itself. The fix defines the "*_start" symbol as a global alias to the >> function instead. > > It seems the _start symbol only needs to exist because > the functions were declared static: > >> -#define FUNC(name) \ >> - asm (#name "_start: .globl " #name "_start\n"); \ >> - static void \ >> - name (void) \ > > But I see nothing that needs them to be static. This > seems simpler to me: It's certainly simpler. Maybe Jan can explain why the functions had been declared static? Your patch fixes the FAILs for me, so if there's no reason for the static-ness, then I agree we should go with that.