050-debian-subset.patch

用于生成linux操作系统下的交叉编译工具链和嵌入式linux系统的根文件系统,支持x86、arm、powerpc等处理器

Patch pending upstream, probably acceptable.
--------------------------------------------



Daniel Jacobowitz <[e-mail]> writes:
> I like this.  The way func_frame_chain_valid should really be used is
> by something like:
> 
>   /* NOTE: tm-i386nw.h and tm-i386v4.h override this.  */
>   set_gdbarch_frame_chain_valid (gdbarch, file_frame_chain_valid);
> 
> (copied from i386-tdep.c).
> 
> Does this patch work for you?

Yes, thanks.  I've included a revised version of my patch below.

> I'm curious as to why we can't just set this universally, or at least a
> little more globally.  Most things that have a main () use it as a
> normal main ().  I'd propose that we set it as the default frame chain,
> and provide/document an option to ignore inside_main_func.

Well, gdbarch is never supposed to change the default behavior of
macros; this helps us convert pre-gdbarch targets incrementally.
Simply turning on gdbarch for one's target ideally wouldn't change its
behavior at all.


[Patch revised for Debian snapshot]
--- snap/gdb/i386-linux-tdep.c.orig	2002-08-18 19:53:57.000000000 -0400
+++ snap/gdb/i386-linux-tdep.c	2002-08-18 19:54:31.000000000 -0400
@@ -452,6 +452,9 @@
 
   set_solib_svr4_fetch_link_map_offsets (gdbarch,
 				       i386_linux_svr4_fetch_link_map_offsets);
+
+  set_gdbarch_frame_chain_valid (gdbarch,
+				 generic_func_frame_chain_valid);
 }
 
 /* Provide a prototype to silence -Wmissing-prototypes.  */
[Hurd needs 6.  Take 8, since it does no real harm.]


Package: gdb
Severity: normal
Tags: patch, sid

Hello,

GDB will crash on the Hurd after issuing the 'show' and hitting enter
a few times:

../../gdb/ui-out.c:130: gdb-internal-error: push_level: Assertion       +`uiout->level >= 0 && uiout->level < MAX_UI_OUT_LEVELS' failed.

the problem is that MAX_UI_OUT_LEVELS is not high enough for the extra
option we have on the Hurd, it should be rised to 6 then, which works
fine:

--- gdb-5.2.cvs20020401/gdb/ui-out.c~   Fri May  3 02:19:20 2002
+++ gdb-5.2.cvs20020401/gdb/ui-out.c    Fri May  3 02:19:32 2002
@@ -45,7 +45,7 @@
    is always available.  Stack/nested level 0 is reserved for the
    top-level result. */
 
-enum { MAX_UI_OUT_LEVELS = 5 };
+enum { MAX_UI_OUT_LEVELS = 8 };
 
 struct ui_out_level
   {

-- 
Robert Millan

"5 years from now everyone will be running
free GNU on their 200 MIPS, 64M SPARCstation-5"

              Andrew S. Tanenbaum, 30 Jan 1992


Submitted upstream, not liked very much.  It's a hack, but it will do for
now.

2002-07-31  Daniel Jacobowitz  <[e-mail]>

	Fix PR gdb/568
	* thread-db.c (lwp_from_thread): Only warn if unable to find
	the thread.

Index: thread-db.c
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvs/src/src/gdb/thread-db.c,v
retrieving revision 1.22
diff -u -p -r1.22 thread-db.c
--- gdb/gdb/thread-db.c	23 Mar 2002 17:38:13 -0000	1.22
+++ gdb/gdb/thread-db.c	31 Jul 2002 16:29:52 -0000
@@ -260,6 +260,12 @@ lwp_from_thread (ptid_t ptid)
     return ptid;
 
   err = td_ta_map_id2thr_p (thread_agent, GET_THREAD (ptid), &th);
+  if (err == TD_ERR)
+    {
+      warning ("Cannot find thread %ld: %s",
+	       (long) GET_THREAD (ptid), thread_db_err_str (err));
+      return ptid;
+    }
   if (err != TD_OK)
     error ("Cannot find thread %ld: %s",
 	   (long) GET_THREAD (ptid), thread_db_err_str (err));
From Michael Fedrowitz <[e-mail]>.  Not submitted to FSF yet.

 Hi,

gdb fails to build from source on m68k because some definitions have
been removed from tm-m68k.h. The patch below readds them.

-Michael


diff -urN gdb-5.2.cvs20020818.orig/gdb/config/m68k/tm-m68k.h gdb-5.2.cvs20020818/gdb/config/m68k/tm-m68k.h
--- gdb-5.2.cvs20020818.orig/gdb/config/m68k/tm-m68k.h	2002-07-10 19:01:38.000000000 +0200
+++ gdb-5.2.cvs20020818/gdb/config/m68k/tm-m68k.h	2002-10-06 18:01:59.000000000 +0200
@@ -26,8 +26,11 @@
 /* Generic 68000 stuff, to be included by other tm-*.h files.  */
 
 /* D0_REGNM and A0_REGNUM must be defined here because they are
-   used by the monitor.  */
+   used by the monitor. FPC_REGNUM, FPS_REGNUM and FPI_REGNUM are
+   defined here because they are used by m68klinux-nat.c.  */
 
 #define D0_REGNUM 0
 #define A0_REGNUM 8
-
+#define FPC_REGNUM 26
+#define FPS_REGNUM 27
+#define FPI_REGNUM 28


2002-11-24  Daniel Jacobowitz  <[e-mail]>

	* doublest.c (convert_floatformat_to_doublest): Cast exp_bias to int.
	* config/alpha/alpha-linux.mh (MH_CFLAGS): Add -mieee.

--- gdb-5.2.debian90.cvs20021120/gdb/doublest.c.orig	2002-11-24 17:48:16.000000000 -0500
+++ gdb-5.2.debian90.cvs20021120/gdb/doublest.c	2002-11-24 17:48:25.000000000 -0500
@@ -177,7 +177,7 @@
   if (!special_exponent)
     exponent -= fmt->exp_bias;
   else if (exponent == 0)
-    exponent = 1 - fmt->exp_bias;
+    exponent = 1 - (int)fmt->exp_bias;
 
   /* Build the result algebraically.  Might go infinite, underflow, etc;
      who cares. */
--- gdb-5.2.debian90.cvs20021120/gdb/config/alpha/alpha-linux.mh.orig	2002-11-24 17:50:30.000000000 -0500
+++ gdb-5.2.debian90.cvs20021120/gdb/config/alpha/alpha-linux.mh	2002-11-24 17:50:41.000000000 -0500
@@ -8,3 +8,5 @@
 
 MMALLOC = 
 MMALLOC_CFLAGS = -DNO_MMALLOC 
+
+MH_CFLAGS = -mieee
In CVS but not in 5.3 branch...

2002-10-23  Daniel Jacobowitz  <[e-mail]>

	* lin-lwp.c (lin_lwp_resume): Remove resume_all test for !step.

Index: lin-lwp.c
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvs/src/src/gdb/lin-lwp.c,v
retrieving revision 1.35
diff -u -p -r1.35 lin-lwp.c
--- gdb-5.2.90/gdb/lin-lwp.c	27 Aug 2002 22:37:06 -0000	1.35
+++ gdb-5.2.90/gdb/lin-lwp.c	23 Oct 2002 04:23:13 -0000
@@ -579,11 +579,8 @@ lin_lwp_resume (ptid_t ptid, int step, e
   struct lwp_info *lp;
   int resume_all;
 
-  /* Apparently the interpretation of PID is dependent on STEP: If
-     STEP is non-zero, a specific PID means `step only this process
-     id'.  But if STEP is zero, then PID means `continue *all*
-     processes, but give the signal only to this one'.  */
-  resume_all = (PIDGET (ptid) == -1) || !step;
+  /* A specific PTID means `step only this process id'.  */
+  resume_all = (PIDGET (ptid) == -1);
 
   if (resume_all)
     iterate_over_lwps (resume_set_callback, NULL);

Not submitted yet, testing.

--- gdb-5.2.90/gdb/alpha-tdep.c.orig	Sun Nov 24 21:42:53 2002
+++ gdb-5.2.90/gdb/alpha-tdep.c	Sun Nov 24 21:48:26 2002
@@ -99,10 +99,12 @@
 
 static alpha_extra_func_info_t heuristic_proc_desc (CORE_ADDR,
 						    CORE_ADDR,
-						    struct frame_info *);
+						    struct frame_info *,
+						    int);
 
 static alpha_extra_func_info_t find_proc_desc (CORE_ADDR,
-					       struct frame_info *);
+					       struct frame_info *,
+					       int);
 
 #if 0
 static int alpha_in_lenient_prologue (CORE_ADDR, CORE_ADDR);
@@ -512,7 +514,7 @@
   if (tmp != 0)
     pc = tmp;
 
-  proc_desc = find_proc_desc (pc, frame->next);
+  proc_desc = find_proc_desc (pc, frame->next, 1);
   pcreg = proc_desc ? PROC_PC_REG (proc_desc) : ALPHA_RA_REGNUM;
 
   if (frame->signal_handler_caller)
@@ -596,10 +598,10 @@
 
 static alpha_extra_func_info_t
 heuristic_proc_desc (CORE_ADDR start_pc, CORE_ADDR limit_pc,
-		     struct frame_info *next_frame)
+		     struct frame_info *next_frame, int read_sp_p)
 {
-  CORE_ADDR sp = read_next_frame_reg (next_frame, SP_REGNUM);
-  CORE_ADDR vfp = sp;
+  CORE_ADDR sp;
+  CORE_ADDR vfp;
   CORE_ADDR cur_pc;
   int frame_size;
   int has_frame_reg = 0;
@@ -607,6 +609,11 @@
   int pcreg = -1;
   int regno;
 
+  if (read_sp_p)
+    vfp = sp = read_next_frame_reg (next_frame, SP_REGNUM);
+  else
+    vfp = sp = 0;
+
   if (start_pc == 0)
     return NULL;
   memset (&temp_proc_desc, '\0', sizeof (temp_proc_desc));
@@ -761,7 +768,7 @@
   CORE_ADDR func_addr, func_end;
 
   if (!proc_desc)
-    proc_desc = find_proc_desc (pc, NULL);
+    proc_desc = find_proc_desc (pc, NULL, 0);
 
   if (proc_desc)
     {
@@ -807,7 +814,7 @@
 }
 
 static alpha_extra_func_info_t
-find_proc_desc (CORE_ADDR pc, struct frame_info *next_frame)
+find_proc_desc (CORE_ADDR pc, struct frame_info *next_frame, int read_sp_p)
 {
   alpha_extra_func_info_t proc_desc;
   struct block *b;
@@ -879,7 +886,7 @@
 	    {
 	      alpha_extra_func_info_t found_heuristic =
 	      heuristic_proc_desc (PROC_LOW_ADDR (proc_desc),
-				   pc, next_frame);
+				   pc, next_frame, read_sp_p);
 	      if (found_heuristic)
 		{
 		  PROC_LOCALOFF (found_heuristic) =
@@ -921,7 +928,7 @@
 	startaddr = heuristic_proc_start (pc);
 
       proc_desc =
-	heuristic_proc_desc (startaddr, pc, next_frame);
+	heuristic_proc_desc (startaddr, pc, next_frame, read_sp_p);
     }
   return proc_desc;
 }
@@ -937,7 +944,7 @@
   if (saved_pc == 0 || inside_entry_file (saved_pc))
     return 0;
 
-  proc_desc = find_proc_desc (saved_pc, frame);
+  proc_desc = find_proc_desc (saved_pc, frame, 1);
   if (!proc_desc)
     return 0;
 
@@ -979,7 +986,7 @@
 {
   /* Use proc_desc calculated in frame_chain */
   alpha_extra_func_info_t proc_desc =
-  frame->next ? cached_proc_desc : find_proc_desc (frame->pc, frame->next);
+  frame->next ? cached_proc_desc : find_proc_desc (frame->pc, frame->next, 1);
 
   frame->extra_info = (struct frame_extra_info *)
     frame_obstack_alloc (sizeof (struct frame_extra_info));
@@ -1291,7 +1298,7 @@
   /* we need proc_desc to know how to restore the registers;
      if it is NULL, construct (a temporary) one */
   if (proc_desc == NULL)
-    proc_desc = find_proc_desc (frame->pc, frame->next);
+    proc_desc = find_proc_desc (frame->pc, frame->next, 1);
 
   /* Question: should we copy this proc_desc and save it in
      frame->proc_desc?  If we do, who will free it?
Not yet submitted upstream.  This requires some serious thinking about. 
If the target stack worked in any logical way, this wouldn't be necessary...
ending up with roughly:
  thread_stratum: thread-db (silent reference to lin-lwp)
  core_stratum: corelow
  exec_stratum: exec
  dummy_stratum: dummy
just makes no sense.