This is the mail archive of the gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com mailing list for the GDB 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] Fix multithread debugging problems on s390


Hi,
attached is a patch that fixes the multi-thread debugging problems on s390.
The functions fill_gregset and fill_fpregset were broken, but seem to be
used only since the gdb thread code has been revised in 5.1. I have
attached the fix also as file in case there are any line mangling in the
code below.

2002-07-12  Gerhard Tonn  <ton@de.ibm.com>

            * s390-nat.c (fill_gregset and fill_fpregset):
              Call regcache_collect functions.



I would appreciate, if someone could commit it to trunk and 5.2 branch, if
possible even for 5.2.1
I'll sit on 5.2.1 for slightly longer.  This one is a regression :-(

Thanks

--- src/gdb/s390-nat.c  Tue Nov  6 22:18:13 2001
+++ /home/ton/gdb/src/gdb/s390-nat.c      Wed Jul 10 10:15:26 2002
@@ -273,14 +273,23 @@
 void
 fill_gregset (gregset_t * gregsetp, int regno)
 {
+  int regi;
   greg_t *gregp = (greg_t *) gregsetp;

   if (regno >= S390_FIRST_CR && regno <= S390_LAST_CR)
-    supply_register (regno, NULL);
+    ;
Can you please add a comment indicating that the NO-OP is intentional and why.

   else if (regno != -1)
-    supply_register (regno, (char *) &gregp[regno]);
-  else
-    supply_gregset (gregsetp);
+    regcache_collect (regno, (char *) &gregp[regno]);
+  else {
GNU coding standards:

  else
    {
      regcache_collect (...,

+    regcache_collect (S390_PSWM_REGNUM, (char *)
I don't believe that the cast is needed. regcache_collect()'s second parameter is void.


&gregp[S390_PSWM_REGNUM]);
+    regcache_collect (S390_PC_REGNUM, (char *) &gregp[S390_PC_REGNUM]);
+    for (regi = 0; regi < S390_NUM_GPRS; regi++)
+      regcache_collect (S390_GP0_REGNUM + regi,
+           (char *) &gregp[S390_GP0_REGNUM + regi]);
Indentation:

regcache_collect (S390_....,
                  &gregp[...]);

+  if (regno == -1) {
GNU Coding style.  Also recommend ``< 0'' as safer:

  if (regno < 0)
    {

+    regcache_collect (S390_FPC_REGNUM, (char *) &fpregsetp->fpc);
+    for (regi = 0; regi < S390_NUM_FPRS; regi++)
+      regcache_collect (S390_FP0_REGNUM + regi, (char *) &fpregsetp->fprs[regi]);
+  }
   else
-    supply_register (regno,
+    regcache_collect (regno,
                 &((char *) fpregsetp)[REGISTER_BYTE (regno) -
                                 REGISTER_BYTE (S390_FPC_REGNUM)]);
Can this be written in a way that doesn't use REGISTER_BYTE()? REGISTER_BYTE() is going to be removed.

 }

(See attached file: gdb-5.2.1-s390.diff)
Andrew



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