On Wed, May 08, 2019 at 06:03:55PM +, Sasha Da Rocha Pinheiro wrote:
> About the *ops returned from dwarf_frame_register():
> Is it correct to say that if we don't get a DW_OP_stack_value as the
> last operation, the value on top of the stack will always be a
> memory address? Meaning you must
0x970
restore r30 (reg30)
restore r29 (reg29)
def_cfa r31 (reg31) at offset 0
nop
nop
nop
nop
nop
nop
nop
From: Mark Wielaard
Sent: Friday, May 3, 2019 4:09 PM
To: Sasha Da Rocha Pinheiro
Cc: elfutils-devel@sourceware.org
Subject: Re: Dwarf_Op
On
se however it is for computing (unsigned) addresses (CFA
plus offset) in which case unsigned arithmetic is fine.
> About the Dwarf_Op array we get from dwarf_frame_register(), (which
> are a sequence of Dwarf expressions): are they suppose to be an
> abstraction to all types of dwarf
So why not a DW_OP_constu or DW_OP_consts and then a DW_OP_plus?
About the Dwarf_Op array we get from dwarf_frame_register(), (which are a
sequence of Dwarf expressions): are they suppose to be an abstraction to all
types of dwarf location descriptions? Including Single (single and composite
amiliar with libdwarf, so don't know how to answer this question
> elfutils only gives us a location description in an array of
> Dwarf_Op. Does it provide methods to "execute" it so we can get the
> result of the expressions? Or it delegates it to the consumer?
It doesn't h
associated with the register rule."
elfutils only gives us a location description in an array of Dwarf_Op. Does it
provide methods to "execute" it so we can get the result of the expressions? Or
it delegates it to the consumer?
Regards
Sasha
From: Mark Wielaard
Sent: Saturd
const.
> Previously I have said it was 0xffe8, because the printf with specifier
> %x printed that way. But gdb seems to print its full 8 bytes.
> I used dwarf_frame_register.
>
> Even though, the member number is of unsigned int type with signed encoded
> values. Am I corre
e_register.
Even though, the member number is of unsigned int type with signed encoded
values. Am I correct?
Sasha
From: Mark Wielaard
Sent: Friday, April 26, 2019 3:20 AM
To: Sasha Da Rocha Pinheiro; elfutils-devel@sourceware.org
Subject: Re: Dwarf_Op
Hi Sasha,
On Thu, 2019-04-25 at 23:5
Hi Sasha,
On Thu, 2019-04-25 at 23:59 +, Sasha Da Rocha Pinheiro wrote:
> I have a Dwarf_Op object whose member "number" has size of 8 bytes.
> Its value although is 0xFFE8.
> Shouldn't it be 0xFFE8 instead?
> Since it means an offset
Hi all,
I have a Dwarf_Op object whose member "number" has size of 8 bytes.
Its value although is 0xFFE8.
Shouldn't it be 0xFFE8 instead?
Since it means an offset, for the current operation, shouldn't it be of a
signed integer type instead of unsigned?
Regards
Sasha
10 matches
Mail list logo
