This is the mail archive of the gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format:	[Raw text]

Re: PATCH: PR 18655

From: Daniel Jacobowitz <drow at false dot org>
To: Mark Mitchell <mark at codesourcery dot com>
Cc: gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org
Date: Mon, 16 May 2005 08:39:18 -0400
Subject: Re: PATCH: PR 18655
References: <200505092025.j49KPTR3028921@sethra.codesourcery.com> <20050509203420.GA11338@nevyn.them.org> <428822AA.3060209@codesourcery.com>

On Sun, May 15, 2005 at 09:33:46PM -0700, Mark Mitchell wrote:
> >It's probably going to require a gruesome unwinding hack anyway. 
> 
> Can you treat a return address of 0x41 in the CFA as meaning 0x6c on 
> PowerPC?  Or notice the mismatch somehow?  (I'm curious, in other words, 
> as to whether you drop the non-DWARF2 unwinding by default, and 
> compensate for the sometimes-broken DWARF2.)

More likely we will treat the two as the same column; 65 is assigned to
the fpscr, right, or something similar?  GCC currently never generates
it and GDB never decodes it because it's not a useful place to store
variables...

-- 
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery, LLC

References:
- PATCH: PR 18655
  - From: Mark Mitchell
- Re: PATCH: PR 18655
  - From: Daniel Jacobowitz
- Re: PATCH: PR 18655
  - From: Mark Mitchell

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]