From: Randolph Chung <randolph@tausq.org>
To: gdb@sources.redhat.com
Cc: John David Anglin <dave@hiauly1.hia.nrc.ca>,
Joel Brobecker <brobecker@adacore.com>
Subject: Register numbers on hppa64
Date: Sat, 26 Nov 2005 09:23:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <43880E6B.8060901@tausq.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200511260253.jAQ2rP7Z021130@hiauly1.hia.nrc.ca>
OK, this is a mess....:)
Apparently we now have at least three different register numbering
schemes for hppa64:
1) gcc "dbx":
0-31: r0-r31
72-135: fr0-fr31 (odd numbers are not used)
60: sar
2) gcc dwarf frame:
unity mapping, so:
0-31: r0-r31
32-59: fr4-fr31
60: sar
3) gdb
0-31: r0-r31
32-63: sar, pcoqh, pcsqh, other "special" registers
64-95: fr0-fr31
4) HP compilers
???
Joel, does your GNAT C compiler output something different from the
above? :-)
Obviously this will not work....
The gdb numbering scheme seems to be there for a long time. I don't know
if this is the way HP numbers registers in their debug format. Does
anybody have a pointer to this information?
I see that in late 2003/early 2004 there was a discussion about archs
with mismatched "dbx register numbers" vs "dwarf CFI register numbers"
on gcc@gcc.gnu.org and gdb-patches@gcc.gnu.org. Back then the discussion
was about ppc64, although i was not quite sure what was the conclusion
of those discussions. hppa64 is in a similar situation.
Any comments or suggestions on how to sort this out? Should I just
change gdb to match what gcc outputs? Should we change gcc to match what
gdb expects? (safer?)
randolph
next parent reply other threads:[~2005-11-26 7:28 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <200511260253.jAQ2rP7Z021130@hiauly1.hia.nrc.ca>
2005-11-26 9:23 ` Randolph Chung [this message]
2005-11-26 15:54 ` Mark Kettenis
2005-11-26 16:52 ` Randolph Chung
2005-11-26 17:32 ` Mark Kettenis
2005-11-26 18:50 ` John David Anglin
2005-11-27 16:30 ` Randolph Chung
2005-11-26 17:34 ` John David Anglin
2005-11-26 17:20 ` John David Anglin
2005-11-26 17:13 ` John David Anglin
2005-11-26 17:52 ` Mark Kettenis
2005-11-26 18:00 ` John David Anglin
2005-11-26 18:31 ` Mark Kettenis
2005-11-27 4:30 ` John David Anglin
2005-11-27 15:10 ` Randolph Chung
2005-11-27 16:52 ` John David Anglin
2005-11-27 17:42 ` Mark Kettenis
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=43880E6B.8060901@tausq.org \
--to=randolph@tausq.org \
--cc=brobecker@adacore.com \
--cc=dave@hiauly1.hia.nrc.ca \
--cc=gdb@sources.redhat.com \
/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).