From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 26262 invoked by alias); 27 Jun 2004 18:57:03 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 26255 invoked from network); 27 Jun 2004 18:57:02 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO nevyn.them.org) (66.93.172.17) by sourceware.org with SMTP; 27 Jun 2004 18:57:02 -0000 Received: from drow by nevyn.them.org with local (Exim 4.34 #1 (Debian)) id 1Beepo-0006Pn-Nv; Sun, 27 Jun 2004 14:57:00 -0400 Date: Sun, 27 Jun 2004 18:57:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: Randolph Chung Cc: Michael Elizabeth Chastain , cagney@gnu.org, gdb@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: native hppa2.0w-hp-hpux11.00, 32-bit versus 64-bit Message-ID: <20040627185700.GA24459@nevyn.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: Randolph Chung , Michael Elizabeth Chastain , cagney@gnu.org, gdb@sources.redhat.com References: <20040627042052.CABC44B104@berman.michael-chastain.com> <20040627184026.GC795@tausq.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20040627184026.GC795@tausq.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.5.1+cvs20040105i X-SW-Source: 2004-06/txt/msg00266.txt.bz2 On Sun, Jun 27, 2004 at 11:40:26AM -0700, Randolph Chung wrote: > > ac> What's the ABI wordsize - the size of a register pushed onto the stack? > > ac> "info registers" should be using that register size and looking at the > > ac> HP/PA code, that appears to be the case. > > > > It's 4 bytes, all right. > > The hppa target naming conventions are a bit weird (to me, at least) > > hppa2.0w-*-* is a 32-bit target, however the w means that you can use > 64-bit registers and the pa2.0 64-bit opcodes (ldd, std, etc) > > hppa64-*-* is the 64-bit target. > > > The funny thing is, gdb 6.1.1 "maint print registers" says that > > r19 is 4 bytes long, but "info reg r19" has special code to print > > all 8 bytes of it. > > > > I'm still kinda dubious, but if it's okay with randolph that the > > debugger quietly operates in 32-bit mode, it's okay with me. > > I would do something like this: > > Yes, i think this is ok. If hppa2.0w-*-* is a 32-bit target (pointers, I assume you mean), but has 64-bit registers, then the regcache for it should indicate that registers are eight bytes wide... maybe this isn't a regression or a surprise, but it's definitely better if you show all bits. -- Daniel Jacobowitz