This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sourceware.org
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: [PATCH 1/3] gdb/printcmd.c: Fix printing of Thumb minimal symbols.
- From: Will Newton <will dot newton at linaro dot org>
- To: Pedro Alves <palves at redhat dot com>
- Cc: "gdb-patches at sourceware dot org" <gdb-patches at sourceware dot org>, Patch Tracking <patches at linaro dot org>
- Date: Wed, 5 Jun 2013 16:27:42 +0100
- Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] gdb/printcmd.c: Fix printing of Thumb minimal symbols.
- References: <51AF1444 dot 5080800 at linaro dot org> <51AF576C dot 7070302 at redhat dot com>
On 5 June 2013 16:21, Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com> wrote:
> On 06/05/2013 11:34 AM, Will Newton wrote:
>>
>> In build_address_symbolic we call gdbarch_addr_bits_remove for
>> symbols in the symbol table but not for minimal symbols. This
>> causes a failure in gdb.cp/virtfunc.exp on ARM, as the address
>> of the virtual thunk is given an offset of 1 when in Thumb mode.
>>
>> gdb/ChangeLog:
>>
>> 2013-06-05 Will Newton <will.newton@linaro.org>
>>
>> * printcmd.c (build_address_symbolic): Call
>> gdbarch_addr_bits_remove for text minimal symbols.
>> ---
>> gdb/printcmd.c | 10 ++++++++++
>> 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/gdb/printcmd.c b/gdb/printcmd.c
>> index 7beb334..619e684 100644
>> --- a/gdb/printcmd.c
>> +++ b/gdb/printcmd.c
>> @@ -689,6 +689,16 @@ build_address_symbolic (struct gdbarch *gdbarch,
>> {
>> if (SYMBOL_VALUE_ADDRESS (msymbol) > name_location || symbol == NULL)
>> {
>> + /* If this is a function (i.e. a code address), strip out any
>> + non-address bits. For instance, display a pointer to the
>> + first instruction of a Thumb function as <function>; the
>> + second instruction will be <function+2>, even though the
>> + pointer is <function+3>. This matches the ISA behavior. */
>> + if (MSYMBOL_TYPE (msymbol) == mst_text
>> + || MSYMBOL_TYPE (msymbol) == mst_text_gnu_ifunc
>> + || MSYMBOL_TYPE (msymbol) == mst_file_text)
>> + addr = gdbarch_addr_bits_remove (gdbarch, addr);
>
> Shouldn't we do this for all text symbols, and thus for
> mst_solib_trampoline too?
Sounds sensible. I'll respin the patch and retest.
--
Will Newton
Toolchain Working Group, Linaro