This is the mail archive of the gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com mailing list for the GDB project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: [RFC] "info registers" is misleading


Richard Earnshaw wrote:
> 
> msnyder@redhat.com said:
> > This is an old old issue.  The frame pointer register is special.
> > Info registers does not show the actual value of the fp register -- it
> > shows the virtual frame pointer (the address of the function's stack
> > frame).  Usually it's the same value -- unles you're in a frameless
> > function (ie. one that does not use the frame pointer register).
> 
> > Now that we have pseudo-registers, we've talked about  adding a
> > pseudo-frame-pointer register and using it for FP_REGNUM, so that the
> > "real" frame pointer register can always display its real value.
> 
> Indeed.  It isn't even confined to Thumb code.  

It isn't even confined to ARM code.  It's true for all architectures.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]