This is the mail archive of the
gdb@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: MIPS stack tracing
- From: Daniel Jacobowitz <drow at mvista dot com>
- To: Don Bowman <don at sandvine dot com>
- Cc: ''Stan Shebs' ' <shebs at apple dot com>, ''Greg McGary' ' <greg at mcgary dot org>,"'gdb at sources dot redhat dot com '" <gdb at sources dot redhat dot com>,"'echristo at redhat dot com '" <echristo at redhat dot com>
- Date: Sun, 3 Feb 2002 11:11:26 -0500
- Subject: Re: MIPS stack tracing
- References: <FE045D4D9F7AED4CBFF1B3B813C853371BC1CF@mail.sandvine.com>
On Sun, Feb 03, 2002 at 10:57:20AM -0500, Don Bowman wrote:
>
> Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
>
> >Most of what it needs should be in .pdr, which is available regardless
> >of -g. I don't believe heuristics should be necessary in that case.
> >The logic is a bit twisted, though...
>
> Has anyone checked out this older message from the mailing list?
>
> Re: Questions about GCC MIPS R5900's mdebug section
> http://sources.redhat.com/ml/gdb/1999-q4/msg00290.html
>
> I indeed have no .mdebug section, and I indeed see an unsuccessful
> search for "__GDB_EFI_INFO__". I do have a .pdr section. On the
> surface this would seem to be my problem.
> Should this sym lookup be prefaced with a check for a .mdebug
> section?
>
> Also, from scanning the sources, I would have to guess that the
> alpha architecture is suffering the same problem.
Perhaps, perhaps not. It depends whether Alpha still uses .mdebug.
.mdebug is the ECOFF/Third-Eye debugging info format; binutils recently
switched to generating stabs-in-ELF like other targets instead.
To my complete surprise, we apparently get PDR information out of the
.mdebug section. This is somewhat bizarre, as it is also present in a
.pdr section independent of data format. We need to read in this
information. I'll investigate next week (if no one beats me to it :).
--
Daniel Jacobowitz Carnegie Mellon University
MontaVista Software Debian GNU/Linux Developer