This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sourceware.org
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: [AArch64][3/6] DWARF unwinder support for signed return address
- From: Pedro Alves <palves at redhat dot com>
- To: Jiong Wang <jiong dot wang at foss dot arm dot com>, GDB <gdb-patches at sourceware dot org>
- Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2017 12:08:13 +0100
- Subject: Re: [AArch64][3/6] DWARF unwinder support for signed return address
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- Authentication-results: ext-mx05.extmail.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com
- Authentication-results: ext-mx05.extmail.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com; spf=fail smtp.mailfrom=palves at redhat dot com
- Dmarc-filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mx1.redhat.com 689032C96FA
- References: <c8484136-c4f2-cda2-6a0d-f8293b111cdd@foss.arm.com> <d5f5b164-3510-e990-8c38-528ea38315d9@foss.arm.com>
On 08/09/2017 01:17 PM, Jiong Wang wrote:
> +
> + /* Only DW_CFA_GNU_window_save is expected on AArch64. */
> + if (op != DW_CFA_GNU_window_save)
> + return false;
> +
Was there any progress in giving this an Aarch64-specific name
to avoid confusion? FYI, I was confused by this again for a couple
minutes when I read it, until I remembered the previous discussions.
> +/* Implement the execute_dwarf_cfa_vendor_op method. */
> +
> +static bool
> +aarch64_execute_dwarf_cfa_vendor_op (struct gdbarch *gdbarch, gdb_byte op,
> + struct dwarf2_frame_state *fs)
> +{
> + struct dwarf2_frame_state_reg *ra_state_column;
> + static unsigned char exp_0 = 0x30; /* DW_OP_lit0. */
> + static unsigned char exp_1 = 0x31; /* DW_OP_lit1. */
Can these be static const? (likewise elsewhere in the patch.)
Also, gdb_byte.
Thanks,
Pedro Alves