Re: Improve end check on rs6000 prologue analyzer

[Daniel Jacobowitz <drow at false dot org>]

On Wed, Oct 18, 2006 at 01:41:31PM +0800, Wu Zhou wrote:
> It seems that powerpc-linux is skipped as a whole:
> 
> if {[istarget *-*-aix*] || ![istarget "powerpc-*-*"]} then {
>     verbose "Skipping PowerPC prologue tests."
>     return
> }
> 
> What about open this for powerpc-linux?  I commented the above code and 
> have a test in both 32-bit and 64-bit mode on a ppc64 box.  For 32-bit 
> mode, there are six more PASS.  And for 64-bit mode, we have still 1 PASS 
> and 9 FAIL.  Why not just keep these FAIL there, to remind us that these 
> are places we need to improve?   Just my two cents anyway.  :-)

Thanks for catching this.  It's a bug in the patch: I was testing
in 32-bit mode on a powerpc64 system, so I removed the "64" from that
skip, but I forgot to put it back!  It should be skipping
powerpc64-*-*; the test won't work there because the asm isn't 64-bit
safe.

> I have yet another proposal to incorporate the bl_to_blrl patch, which is 
> discussed in http://sources.redhat.com/ml/gdb/2006-10/msg00085.html, into 
> this one.  Both are improvement for rs6000 prologue analyzer.

They're not related patches.  We'll deal with them separately.  I just
haven't had a chance to look at it yet, nor has anyone else, I suppose.


-- 
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery