Since GCC 8, we have output incorrect numbers for the transactional
memory registers.
Also, we didn't output the correct DWARF register numbers for those.
The number for sprN is 100+N.
This fixes both these issues.
Tested on powerpc64-linux (-m32,-m64} and on powerpc64le-linux.
Committing. I hope this (and the next patch) doesn't break targets
using the old DWARF register numbers, I cannot easily test that; but
it's stage 1.
This should be backported to GCC 8 and GCC 9 (9.2).
Segher
2019-05-02 Segher Boessenkool <seg...@kernel.crashing.org>
* config/rs6000/rs6000.c (rs6000_dbx_register_number): Return the
correct numbers for TFHAR, TFIAR, TEXASR.
---
gcc/config/rs6000/rs6000.c | 22 +++++++++++++++++++---
1 file changed, 19 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/gcc/config/rs6000/rs6000.c b/gcc/config/rs6000/rs6000.c
index f0de18d..f8e9fd2 100644
--- a/gcc/config/rs6000/rs6000.c
+++ b/gcc/config/rs6000/rs6000.c
@@ -36269,10 +36269,20 @@ rs6000_init_dwarf_reg_sizes_extra (tree address)
unsigned int
rs6000_dbx_register_number (unsigned int regno, unsigned int format)
{
- /* Except for the above, we use the internal number for non-DWARF
- debug information, and also for .eh_frame. */
+ /* We use the GCC 7 (and before) internal number for non-DWARF debug
+ information, and also for .eh_frame. */
if ((format == 0 && write_symbols != DWARF2_DEBUG) || format == 2)
- return regno;
+ {
+ /* Translate the regnos to their numbers in GCC 7 (and before). */
+ if (regno == TFHAR_REGNO)
+ regno = 114;
+ else if (regno == TFIAR_REGNO)
+ regno = 115;
+ else if (regno == TEXASR_REGNO)
+ regno = 116;
+
+ return regno;
+ }
/* On some platforms, we use the standard DWARF register
numbering for .debug_info and .debug_frame. */
@@ -36299,6 +36309,12 @@ rs6000_dbx_register_number (unsigned int regno,
unsigned int format)
return 356;
if (regno == VSCR_REGNO)
return 67;
+ if (regno == TFHAR_REGNO)
+ return 228;
+ if (regno == TFIAR_REGNO)
+ return 229;
+ if (regno == TEXASR_REGNO)
+ return 230;
#endif
return regno;
}
--
1.8.3.1
