This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Bogus PPC64 return-colum? Was: [Fwd: Re: [PATCH] S/390 DWARF-2 CFI frame support]
- From: Geoff Keating <geoffk at geoffk dot org>
- To: Mark Kettenis <kettenis at chello dot nl>
- Cc: cagney at redhat dot com, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: 02 Jan 2004 15:07:16 -0800
- Subject: Re: Bogus PPC64 return-colum? Was: [Fwd: Re: [PATCH] S/390 DWARF-2 CFI frame support]
- References: <3FF328F7.2070205@gnu.org><20040101110125.GB26668@bubble.sa.bigpond.net.au><200401011324.i01DO88A023430@elgar.kettenis.dyndns.org>
Mark Kettenis <kettenis@chello.nl> writes:
> Date: Thu, 1 Jan 2004 21:31:25 +1030
> From: Alan Modra <amodra@bigpond.net.au>
>
> PPC64 (and PPC32) GCC currently ignores the DWARF register numbering,
> and instead just uses the internal GCC numbering. It's easy to fix,
> except that we need some ABI doco changes to accommodate GCC's splitting
> of cr into fields, but once fixed we run into the problem of what to do
> about current binaries. Is it worth hacking gdb to support them?
What about DWARF-based exception handling? (In particular, note that
some parts of the cr are caller-saved.)
--
- Geoffrey Keating <geoffk@geoffk.org>