public inbox for gdb-prs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "vries at gcc dot gnu.org" <sourceware-bugzilla@sourceware.org>
To: gdb-prs@sourceware.org
Subject: [Bug tdep/29409] [gdb, tdep/aarch64] FAIL: gdb.opt/inline-small-func.exp: info breakpoints
Date: Tue, 26 Jul 2022 08:51:01 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <bug-29409-4717-tKgHa0Vjpg@http.sourceware.org/bugzilla/> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <bug-29409-4717@http.sourceware.org/bugzilla/>
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29409
Tom de Vries <vries at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |aburgess at redhat dot com,
| |luis.machado at arm dot com
--- Comment #1 from Tom de Vries <vries at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
We have these different reliability tests:
i386 / amd64:
...
if (post_prologue_pc
&& (cust != NULL
&& cust->producer () != NULL
&& (producer_is_llvm (cust->producer ())
|| producer_is_icc_ge_19 (cust->producer ()))))
return std::max (start_pc, post_prologue_pc);
...
arm:
...
if (post_prologue_pc
&& (cust == NULL
|| cust->producer () == NULL
|| startswith (cust->producer (), "GNU ")
|| producer_is_llvm (cust->producer ())))
return post_prologue_pc;
...
I wonder if it's a good idea to do this in target-dependent code. That is, do
these guarantees by the compilers work only for specific targets?
Perhaps it's a better to move these tests to common code, and let targets
specify exceptions on it.
Note btw that with arm cust == nullptr and cust->producer () == nullptr are
reasons to trust the skip_prologue_using_sal result, in contrast with i386 /
amd64.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-07-26 8:51 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-07-26 8:25 [Bug tdep/29409] New: " vries at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-07-26 8:51 ` vries at gcc dot gnu.org [this message]
2022-07-26 8:56 ` [Bug tdep/29409] " vries at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-07-26 9:05 ` vries at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-07-26 9:12 ` luis.machado at arm dot com
2022-07-26 10:58 ` vries at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-07-26 11:14 ` vries at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-07-26 12:57 ` vries at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-07-26 13:10 ` luis.machado at arm dot com
2022-07-26 13:36 ` vries at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-07-26 13:58 ` luis.machado at arm dot com
2022-07-26 14:47 ` vries at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-07-26 15:30 ` vries at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-08-10 13:50 ` vries at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-08-11 11:59 ` vries at gcc dot gnu.org
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=bug-29409-4717-tKgHa0Vjpg@http.sourceware.org/bugzilla/ \
--to=sourceware-bugzilla@sourceware.org \
--cc=gdb-prs@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).