This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sourceware.org
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: [RFA] MIPS/GDB: Fix the handling of MIPS16 thunks
On Wed, 11 Apr 2012, Richard Sandiford wrote:
> > [Richard, I've cc-ed you as the MIPS port maintainer of GCC and binutils,
> > the producers of MIPS16 and some other thunks covered here, in case you
> > had anything to add, and just so that you know this issue is being
> > addressed now.]
>
> Sounds like great work, thanks. Hope it goes in.
Well, there's only this small issue of gdbarch_in_solib_return_trampoline
-- it shouldn't be too hard to overcome. :)
> I don't really have anything constructive to say, but just out of
> curiosity: we "fixed" call/return stubs to have unwind information for
> GCC 4.7. Do you happen to know whether the test passes with that change?
I am not completely sure as I haven't tried it/got to 4.7 yet (you may
remember I had troubles building the head of the tree; I saw you fixed
that at some point, thanks), but it looks to me the generic trampoline
stuff I rely on here is tangential to any particular frame unwinders (as
long as they get their details right, of course, which may not necessarily
be true in all cases, as it is with the heuristic unwinders), so it should
keep working. I'll see if I can get to verifying this soon.
Did you actually add this unwind information for both the mips16.S pieces
and the compiler generated bits (how about the PIC stubs produced by LD?)?
Does that happen to address the problem I reported here:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2011-12/msg01067.html
? Note that it's not a coincidence the function name there is the same as
one of those I used in the test case posted here -- this GDB test case
will fail without a fix for that GCC problem just like the test case I
posted there did.
Maciej