From: Thomas Schwinge <thomas@codesourcery.com>
To: <gdb-patches@sourceware.org>
Cc: <yao@codesourcery.com>, <gdb@sourceware.org>,
Mark Kettenis <mark.kettenis@xs4all.nl>, <uweigand@de.ibm.com>,
<stcarrez@nerim.fr>
Subject: Re: Memory corruption for host double format different from target double format
Date: Wed, 29 Aug 2012 15:37:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <876281lnft.fsf@schwinge.name> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <201208101431.q7AEVlMM027471@glazunov.sibelius.xs4all.nl>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 4687 bytes --]
Hi!
On Fri, 10 Aug 2012 16:31:47 +0200, Mark Kettenis <mark.kettenis@xs4all.nl> wrote:
> > Date: Fri, 10 Aug 2012 14:56:46 +0200 (CEST)
> > From: "Ulrich Weigand" <uweigand@de.ibm.com>
> >
> > Yao Qi wrote:
> > > On Friday, August 10, 2012 11:32:53 AM Thomas Schwinge wrote:
> > > > That is, if set_gdbarch_double_format has not been called, it will
> > > > default to floatformats_ieee_double -- even though set_gdbarch_double_bit
> > > > may have been called setting it unequal to the 64-bit double format.
> > > > Hmm, and gdbarch.c:verify_gdbarch has the following comment on top of it:
> > > > Ensure that all values in a GDBARCH are reasonable. ;-)
> > >
> > > Looks like some checking like this is missing?
> > >
> > > gdbarch->float_format->totalsize <= gdbarch->float_bit
> > > gdbarch->double_format->totalsize <= gdbarch->double_bit
> >
> > In fact, I'd prefer to make gdbarch_double_format etc. *mandatory*
> > and gdbarch_double_bit etc. optional, defaulting to the format size.
> > (Currently, _bit is mandatory and _format is optional.)
> >
> > This would mean that nearly all calls to set_gdbarch_double_bit
> > could go away, with the exception of special cases like "long double"
> > on i386 ...
>
> Initializing _bit based on _format by default makes sense, but I don't
> think this is easy to implement given the way how the gdbarch.c code
> is generated.
>
> Making _format mandatory doesn't make sense to me though. I'd say
> that ieee_single and ieee_double are perfectly reasonable defaults for
> float_format and double_format.
Is there a reasonable way for at least detecting the mismatch that I
happened to observe for SH?
Other than that, OK to check in the following? I have only tested the SH
bits; no maintainer listed for h8300, Stephane CCed for m68hc11.
gdb/
* h8300-tdep.c (h8300_gdbarch_init): Invoke
set_gdbarch_double_format and set_gdbarch_long_double_format.
* m68hc11-tdep.c (m68hc11_gdbarch_init): Invoke
set_gdbarch_double_format.
* sh-tdep.c (sh_gdbarch_init): Likewise.
diff --git a/gdb/h8300-tdep.c b/gdb/h8300-tdep.c
index 7fc4daa..bcb769e 100644
--- a/gdb/h8300-tdep.c
+++ b/gdb/h8300-tdep.c
@@ -1351,7 +1351,9 @@ h8300_gdbarch_init (struct gdbarch_info info, struct gdbarch_list *arches)
set_gdbarch_long_bit (gdbarch, 4 * TARGET_CHAR_BIT);
set_gdbarch_long_long_bit (gdbarch, 8 * TARGET_CHAR_BIT);
set_gdbarch_double_bit (gdbarch, 4 * TARGET_CHAR_BIT);
+ set_gdbarch_double_format (gdbarch, floatformats_ieee_single);
set_gdbarch_long_double_bit (gdbarch, 4 * TARGET_CHAR_BIT);
+ set_gdbarch_long_double_format (gdbarch, floatformats_ieee_single);
set_gdbarch_believe_pcc_promotion (gdbarch, 1);
diff --git a/gdb/m68hc11-tdep.c b/gdb/m68hc11-tdep.c
index 79629ef..cd32459 100644
--- a/gdb/m68hc11-tdep.c
+++ b/gdb/m68hc11-tdep.c
@@ -1498,7 +1498,16 @@ m68hc11_gdbarch_init (struct gdbarch_info info,
set_gdbarch_short_bit (gdbarch, 16);
set_gdbarch_int_bit (gdbarch, elf_flags & E_M68HC11_I32 ? 32 : 16);
set_gdbarch_float_bit (gdbarch, 32);
- set_gdbarch_double_bit (gdbarch, elf_flags & E_M68HC11_F64 ? 64 : 32);
+ if (elf_flags & E_M68HC11_F64)
+ {
+ set_gdbarch_double_bit (gdbarch, 64);
+ set_gdbarch_double_format (gdbarch, floatformats_ieee_double);
+ }
+ else
+ {
+ set_gdbarch_double_bit (gdbarch, 32);
+ set_gdbarch_double_format (gdbarch, floatformats_ieee_single);
+ }
set_gdbarch_long_double_bit (gdbarch, 64);
set_gdbarch_long_bit (gdbarch, 32);
set_gdbarch_ptr_bit (gdbarch, 16);
diff --git a/gdb/sh-tdep.c b/gdb/sh-tdep.c
index 1ede13a..caf940d 100644
--- a/gdb/sh-tdep.c
+++ b/gdb/sh-tdep.c
@@ -2299,6 +2299,7 @@ sh_gdbarch_init (struct gdbarch_info info, struct gdbarch_list *arches)
case bfd_mach_sh2e:
/* doubles on sh2e and sh3e are actually 4 byte. */
set_gdbarch_double_bit (gdbarch, 4 * TARGET_CHAR_BIT);
+ set_gdbarch_double_format (gdbarch, floatformats_ieee_single);
set_gdbarch_register_name (gdbarch, sh_sh2e_register_name);
set_gdbarch_register_type (gdbarch, sh_sh3e_register_type);
@@ -2344,6 +2345,7 @@ sh_gdbarch_init (struct gdbarch_info info, struct gdbarch_list *arches)
case bfd_mach_sh2a_or_sh3e:
/* doubles on sh2e and sh3e are actually 4 byte. */
set_gdbarch_double_bit (gdbarch, 4 * TARGET_CHAR_BIT);
+ set_gdbarch_double_format (gdbarch, floatformats_ieee_single);
set_gdbarch_register_name (gdbarch, sh_sh3e_register_name);
set_gdbarch_register_type (gdbarch, sh_sh3e_register_type);
Grüße,
Thomas
[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 489 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-08-29 15:37 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-08-09 18:19 Thomas Schwinge
2012-08-10 9:33 ` Thomas Schwinge
2012-08-10 10:37 ` Yao Qi
2012-08-10 12:57 ` Ulrich Weigand
2012-08-10 14:32 ` Mark Kettenis
2012-08-29 15:37 ` Thomas Schwinge [this message]
2012-08-30 15:38 ` Thomas Schwinge
2012-09-07 8:20 ` Thomas Schwinge
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=876281lnft.fsf@schwinge.name \
--to=thomas@codesourcery.com \
--cc=gdb-patches@sourceware.org \
--cc=gdb@sourceware.org \
--cc=mark.kettenis@xs4all.nl \
--cc=stcarrez@nerim.fr \
--cc=uweigand@de.ibm.com \
--cc=yao@codesourcery.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).