Re: [RFA/prec] Make i386 handle segment register better

[Hui Zhu <teawater at gmail dot com>]

On Mon, Sep 7, 2009 at 08:06, Michael Snyder<msnyder@vmware.com> wrote:
> Hui Zhu wrote:
>>
>> On Sun, Sep 6, 2009 at 14:52, Hui Zhu<teawater@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi guys,
>>>
>>> Sorry I didn't do more test for this patch on amd64 before I check it in.
>>>
>>> But this patch really work not very good in amd64.
>>>
> [...]
>>>
>>> I think remove this patch from gdb-cvs-head before 7.0 branch ?and
>>> make the segment reg clear is better.
>>>
>>> What ?do you think about it?
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Hui
>>>
>>
>> I make a patch for it. ?Please help me review it.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Hui
>>
>> 2009-09-06 ?Hui Zhu ?<teawater@gmail.com>
>>
>> ? ? ? ?* i386-tdep.c (i386_record_check_override): Deleted.
>> ? ? ? ?(i386_record_lea_modrm): Ditto.
>> ? ? ? ?(i386_process_record): Ditto.
>
> ? ? ? ?(i386_process_record): Revert the use of deleted
> ? ? ? ?function 'i386_record_check_override'.
> ? ? ? ?(i386_record_lea_modrm): Ditto.
>
> Looks to me like you've preserved what you could
> of the change, and removed the minimum. ?Good.
>
> This looks ok to commit.
>
>

Thanks.  Checked in.

Hui

>
>>
>> ---
>> ?i386-tdep.c | ? 37 +++++++++++--------------------------
>> ?1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 26 deletions(-)
>>
>> --- a/i386-tdep.c
>> +++ b/i386-tdep.c
>> @@ -3148,26 +3148,6 @@ no_rm:
>> ? return 0;
>> ?}
>>
>> -static int
>> -i386_record_check_override (struct i386_record_s *irp)
>> -{
>> - ?if (irp->override >= 0 && irp->override != X86_RECORD_DS_REGNUM)
>> - ? ?{
>> - ? ? ?ULONGEST orv, ds;
>> -
>> - ? ? ?regcache_raw_read_unsigned (irp->regcache,
>> - ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?irp->regmap[irp->override],
>> - ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?&orv);
>> - ? ? ?regcache_raw_read_unsigned (irp->regcache,
>> - ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?irp->regmap[X86_RECORD_DS_REGNUM],
>> - ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?&ds);
>> - ? ? ?if (orv != ds)
>> - ? ? ? ?return 1;
>> - ? ?}
>> -
>> - ?return 0;
>> -}
>> -
>> ?/* Record the value of the memory that willbe changed in current
>> instruction
>> ? ?to "record_arch_list".
>> ? ?Return -1 if something wrong. */
>> @@ -3178,7 +3158,7 @@ i386_record_lea_modrm (struct i386_recor
>> ? struct gdbarch *gdbarch = irp->gdbarch;
>> ? uint64_t addr;
>>
>> - ?if (i386_record_check_override (irp))
>> + ?if (irp->override >= 0)
>> ? ? {
>> ? ? ? warning (_("Process record ignores the memory change "
>> ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?"of instruction at address %s because it "
>> @@ -4060,7 +4040,7 @@ reswitch:
>> ? ? ? /* mov EAX */
>> ? ? case 0xa2:
>> ? ? case 0xa3:
>> - ? ? ?if (i386_record_check_override (&ir))
>> + ? ? ?if (ir.override >= 0)
>> ? ? ? ? {
>> ? ? ? ? ?warning (_("Process record ignores the memory change "
>> ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?"of instruction at address 0x%s because "
>> @@ -4478,8 +4458,13 @@ reswitch:
>> ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ir.regmap[X86_RECORD_REDI_REGNUM],
>> ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? &tmpulongest);
>>
>> - ? ? ? ? ?ir.override = X86_RECORD_ES_REGNUM;
>> - ? ? ? ? ?if (ir.aflag && i386_record_check_override (&ir))
>> + ? ? ? ? ?regcache_raw_read_unsigned (ir.regcache,
>> + ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?ir.regmap[X86_RECORD_ES_REGNUM],
>> + ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?&es);
>> + ? ? ? ? ?regcache_raw_read_unsigned (ir.regcache,
>> + ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?ir.regmap[X86_RECORD_DS_REGNUM],
>> + ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?&ds);
>> + ? ? ? ? ?if (ir.aflag && (es != ds))
>> ? ? ? ? ? ? {
>> ? ? ? ? ? ? ? /* addr += ((uint32_t) read_register (I386_ES_REGNUM)) << 4;
>> */
>> ? ? ? ? ? ? ? warning (_("Process record ignores the memory "
>> @@ -5103,7 +5088,7 @@ reswitch:
>> ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?opcode = opcode << 8 | ir.modrm;
>> ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?goto no_support;
>> ? ? ? ? ? ? ?}
>> - ? ? ? ? ? if (i386_record_check_override (&ir))
>> + ? ? ? ? ? if (ir.override >= 0)
>> ? ? ? ? ? ? ?{
>> ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?warning (_("Process record ignores the memory "
>> ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?"change of instruction at "
>> @@ -5154,7 +5139,7 @@ reswitch:
>> ? ? ? ? ?else
>> ? ? ? ? ? ?{
>> ? ? ? ? ? ? ?/* sidt */
>> - ? ? ? ? ? ? if (i386_record_check_override (&ir))
>> + ? ? ? ? ? ? if (ir.override >= 0)
>> ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?{
>> ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?warning (_("Process record ignores the memory "
>> ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?"change of instruction at "
>>
>
>