From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 26264 invoked by alias); 26 Nov 2005 18:00:39 -0000 Received: (qmail 26254 invoked by uid 22791); 26 Nov 2005 18:00:38 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from sibelius.xs4all.nl (HELO sibelius.xs4all.nl) (82.92.89.47) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Sat, 26 Nov 2005 18:00:38 +0000 Received: from elgar.sibelius.xs4all.nl (root@elgar.sibelius.xs4all.nl [192.168.0.2]) by sibelius.xs4all.nl (8.13.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id jAQI0QaZ010744; Sat, 26 Nov 2005 19:00:26 +0100 (CET) Received: from elgar.sibelius.xs4all.nl (kettenis@localhost.sibelius.xs4all.nl [127.0.0.1]) by elgar.sibelius.xs4all.nl (8.13.4/8.13.3) with ESMTP id jAQI0Q0C031906; Sat, 26 Nov 2005 19:00:26 +0100 (CET) Received: (from kettenis@localhost) by elgar.sibelius.xs4all.nl (8.13.4/8.13.4/Submit) id jAQI0QuJ028927; Sat, 26 Nov 2005 19:00:26 +0100 (CET) Date: Sat, 26 Nov 2005 18:31:00 -0000 Message-Id: <200511261800.jAQI0QuJ028927@elgar.sibelius.xs4all.nl> From: Mark Kettenis To: dave@hiauly1.hia.nrc.ca CC: randolph@tausq.org, gdb@sources.redhat.com, brobecker@adacore.com In-reply-to: <200511261752.jAQHqPrA004033@hiauly1.hia.nrc.ca> (dave@hiauly1.hia.nrc.ca) Subject: Re: Register numbers on hppa64 References: <200511261752.jAQHqPrA004033@hiauly1.hia.nrc.ca> Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2005-11/txt/msg00585.txt.bz2 > Date: Sat, 26 Nov 2005 12:52:25 -0500 (EST) > From: "John David Anglin" > > > But we have a de-facto ABI since GCC has been using > > DBX_REGISTER_NUMBER for all non-CFI DWARF2 output. I never noticed > > DWARF2_FRAME_REG_OUT before, but it seems to implement a suggestion I > > made in the ppc64 discussion. Now that it's there I really think you > > should consider using it for hppa/hppa64 too. Something like > > > > #define DWARF2_FRAME_REG_OUT(REGNO, FOR_EH) \ > > ((FOR_EH) ? (REGNO) : DBX_REGISTER_NUMBER (REGNO) > > > > if pa32-reg.h and pa64-reg.h should be enough. > > > > Meanwhile, I should get busy and implement the necessary support in > > gdb to cope with the fact that .debug_frame has a different encoding > > than .eh_frame. > > Let me understand, are you saying that .debug_frame has a mix > of gcc and dbx register numbers at present (i.e., it contains > both cfi and non-cfi data)? If that's the case and it's hard > for gdb to tell the difference, then I agree that we should > make the above change. No what I'm saying is that .dwarf_frame uses different register numbers than .debug_info and other .debug_xxx sections. This is awkward and confusing because the same DWARF operations that refer to register numbers are used in both sections but suddenly have a different meaning. Mark