This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sourceware.org
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: [PATCH] Fix possible alignment issue with dw2-dir-file-name test case
- From: Pedro Alves <alves dot ped at gmail dot com>
- To: Pedro Alves <palves at redhat dot com>
- Cc: Andreas Arnez <arnez at linux dot vnet dot ibm dot com>, Edjunior Barbosa Machado <emachado at linux dot vnet dot ibm dot com>, Jan Kratochvil <jan dot kratochvil at redhat dot com>, gdb-patches at sourceware dot org, Ulrich Weigand <uweigand at de dot ibm dot com>, Andreas Krebbel <krebbel at linux dot vnet dot ibm dot com>, Omair Javaid <omair dot javaid at linaro dot org>
- Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2014 18:20:16 +0000
- Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix possible alignment issue with dw2-dir-file-name test case
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <87a9f65p73 dot fsf at br87z6lw dot de dot ibm dot com> <52CFD97A dot 4040009 at redhat dot com> <87mwj352p5 dot fsf at br87z6lw dot de dot ibm dot com> <20140110145327 dot GA23695 at host2 dot jankratochvil dot net> <52D014B7 dot 6040305 at redhat dot com> <52D6FEA9 dot 6010605 at linux dot vnet dot ibm dot com> <52D7EEA9 dot 4030006 at redhat dot com> <874n5232yj dot fsf at br87z6lw dot de dot ibm dot com> <52D971DA dot 90807 at redhat dot com>
BTW,
(adding Omair)
On 01/17/2014 05:58 PM, Andreas Arnez wrote:
> +/* Notes: (1) The '*_start' label below is needed because 'name' may
> + point to a function descriptor instead of to the actual code. (2)
> + The '.balign' should specify the highest possible function
> + alignment across all supported architectures, such that the label
> + never points into the alignment gap. */
> +
> #define FUNC(name) \
> - void \
> + asm (".balign 8"); \
> + asm (#name "_start: .globl " #name "_start\n"); \
> + static void \
> name (void) \
Not sure you were following the
"testsuite/gdb.dwarf2: Fix for dw2-ifort-parameter failure on ARM"
thread. Seems to me this exact same thing should be done to
dw2-ifort-parameter.c. I assume that test is currently failing
on ppc64 for the exact same reason, and that if it's not failing
on S390 with current gcc, it'll be by lucky alignment. I believe
this approach should fix Thumb there as well. Can you guys
coordinate on handling that test? Thanks.
--
Pedro Alves