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: [RFC] "info registers" is misleading

From: Andrew Cagney <ac131313 at cygnus dot com>
To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz at is dot elta dot co dot il>
Cc: msnyder at redhat dot com, fnf at redhat dot com,gdb-patches at sources dot redhat dot com
Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2002 10:23:36 -0500
Subject: Re: [RFC] "info registers" is misleading
References: <200201220651.g0M6pMe17608@fred.ninemoons.com> <3C4D0FF4.57D1@redhat.com> <8361-Tue22Jan2002124617+0200-eliz@is.elta.co.il>

> Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2002 23:08:36 -0800
>> From: Michael Snyder <msnyder@redhat.com>
>> 
>> This is an old old issue.  The frame pointer register
>> is special.  Info registers does not show the actual
>> value of the fp register -- it shows the virtual frame pointer
>> (the address of the function's stack frame).  Usually
>> it's the same value -- unles you're in a frameless function
>> (ie. one that does not use the frame pointer register).
> 
> 
> Shouldn't we document this?  I can write up the change, if you tell
> me that the above description is all that there is to it.


It is :-) Per gdb/251, the doco gets it right!  It is GDB that is 
getting it wrong :-(

Andrew

References:
- [RFC] "info registers" is misleading
  - From: Fred Fish
- Re: [RFC] "info registers" is misleading
  - From: Michael Snyder
- Re: [RFC] "info registers" is misleading
  - From: Eli Zaretskii

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