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 Thu, 12 Apr 2012, Richard Sandiford wrote:
> > Did you actually add this unwind information for both the mips16.S pieces
> > and the compiler generated bits
>
> Yes. But like I say, the fix was only (suppoed to be) for what you
> called call/return stubs, i.e. those in which the stub JALs to the target,
> fiddles with the return value afterwards, then JRs back to the caller.
OK, just wanted to be sure.
BTW, do you also find the choice of "__call_stub_" and "__call_stub_fp_"
for function prefixes unfortunate? You can't really tell them apart in
all cases except by interpreting code as you can have a valid user
function starting with "fp_" -- this is not a reserved namespace, unlike
anything starting with "_". These should really be "__call_stub_" and
"__call_fp_stub_" or whatever, one just shouldn't be a substring of the
other, sigh...
> It wasn't intended to touch pure "run this code first" stubs like...
>
> > (how about the PIC stubs produced by LD?)?
>
> ...these.
Ack. They're mostly handled by GDB already anyway.
> > Does that happen to address the problem I reported here:
> >
> > http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2011-12/msg01067.html
>
> 'Fraid not. It was a separate problem.
Any chance you'll be able to look into it anytime soon? I can cope with
the patch I proposed there, but people may prefer an in-tree solution and
it doesn't look like I'll have time in the near future to work on anything
like what you've outlined instead of my simple solution.
Maciej