This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sourceware.org
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: [RFA/RFC] mips tracepoint: fix Bug 12013
> From: Hui Zhu <teawater@gmail.com>
> Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2010 22:45:15 +0800
>
> Did not get any reason.
?
> Checked in.
I told you this is wrong. You'll have to fix this in a different way.
I'm not familliar with the tracepoint stuff, so I can't really help
you with that.
Please back this out immediately.
> On Sun, Dec 19, 2010 at 20:15, Hui Zhu <teawater@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Sun, Dec 19, 2010 at 18:39, Mark Kettenis <mark.kettenis@xs4all.nl> wrote:
> >>> From: Hui Zhu <teawater@gmail.com>
> >>> Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2010 16:35:59 +0800
> >>>
> >>> http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=12013
> >>>
> >>> This bug make mips tracepoint cannot trace the backtrace.
> >>>
> >>> This patch to fix this issue with a directly way just remove the
> >>> decline of access to the raw register names.
> >>>
> >>> If you think it's not OK. ?What about add a new interface to gdbarch
> >>> to access to the raw register names.
> >>
> >> It is a common trick to return an empty register name for a (raw)
> >> register to hide the register from the user. ?So I don't think this
> >> diff is ok, since the goal obviously is to hide the raw registers in
> >> mips in favour of the pseudo registers.
> >
> > Could you tell me what this hide for? ?I didn't find who get some
> > advantage form this part?
> >
> >>
> >> I'd say the proper way forward is to teach the trace code to handle
> >> pseudo registers.
> >
> > void
> > regcache_cooked_read (struct regcache *regcache, int regnum, gdb_byte *buf)
> > {
> > ?gdb_assert (regnum >= 0);
> > ?gdb_assert (regnum < regcache->descr->nr_cooked_registers);
> > ?if (regnum < regcache->descr->nr_raw_registers)
> > ? ?regcache_raw_read (regcache, regnum, buf);
> > ?else if (regcache->readonly_p
> > ? ? ? ? ? && regnum < regcache->descr->nr_cooked_registers
> > ? ? ? ? ? && regcache->register_valid_p[regnum])
> > ? ?/* Read-only register cache, perhaps the cooked value was cached? ?*/
> > ? ?memcpy (buf, register_buffer (regcache, regnum),
> > ? ? ? ? ? ?regcache->descr->sizeof_register[regnum]);
> > ?else
> > ? ?gdbarch_pseudo_register_read (regcache->descr->gdbarch, regcache,
> > ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?regnum, buf);
> > }
> >
> > For now, even if gdb doesn't how to handle pseudo, it put it to
> > gdbarch. ?I need add a new interface to gdbarch to handle it if we
> > really need.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Hui
> >
> >>
> >>> 2010-12-19 ?Hui Zhu ?<teawater@gmail.com>
> >>>
> >>> ? ? ? * mips-tdep.c (mips_register_name): Remove the check.
> >>> ? ? ? (mips_print_registers_info): Remove the gdb_assert.
> >>>
> >>
> >
>
>