[PATCH/RFA] arm-netbsdelf cross-debugging fixes

[Jason R Thorpe]

On Tue, Sep 03, 2002 at 08:23:01PM +0100, Richard Earnshaw wrote:

 > > While there, I also fixed a problem with arm_addr_bits_remove -- No
 > > 26-bit systems can run in Thumb mode, and so doing an arm_pc_is_thumb
 > > on them is unnecessary (and could return incorrect results if debugging
 > > code which runs in FIQ mode, since (pc & 1) == FIQ mode on those CPUs).
 > > 
 > Yep, that would be a good move, but it would be easier to say yes if it 
 > were a separate patch.

Ok, here's this one, separated out.

	* arm-tdep.c (arm_addr_bits_remove): Don't check for Thumb mode
	if arm_apcs_32 is false.

-- 
        -- Jason R. Thorpe <thorpej@wasabisystems.com>
-------------- next part --------------
Index: arm-tdep.c
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvs/src/src/gdb/arm-tdep.c,v
retrieving revision 1.69
diff -c -r1.69 arm-tdep.c
*** arm-tdep.c	24 Aug 2002 00:21:34 -0000	1.69
--- arm-tdep.c	3 Sep 2002 22:29:17 -0000
***************
*** 225,234 ****
  static CORE_ADDR
  arm_addr_bits_remove (CORE_ADDR val)
  {
!   if (arm_pc_is_thumb (val))
!     return (val & (arm_apcs_32 ? 0xfffffffe : 0x03fffffe));
    else
!     return (val & (arm_apcs_32 ? 0xfffffffc : 0x03fffffc));
  }
  
  /* When reading symbols, we need to zap the low bit of the address,
--- 225,234 ----
  static CORE_ADDR
  arm_addr_bits_remove (CORE_ADDR val)
  {
!   if (arm_apcs_32)
!     return (val & (arm_pc_is_thumb (val) ? 0xfffffffe : 0xfffffffc));
    else
!     return (val & 0x03fffffc);
  }
  
  /* When reading symbols, we need to zap the low bit of the address,