On Tue, 2012-11-27 at 19:49 +0100, Ulrich Weigand wrote:
> Mark Wielaard wrote:
>
> > Which other unwinders are out there, that might rely on the current
> > numbering?
>
> Well, runtime unwinders using .eh_frame should be fine, since this
> uses (and has always used) consistently the GCC numberi
> Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2012 19:43:40 +0100 (CET)
> From: "Ulrich Weigand"
>
> Mark Kettenis wrote:
> > > Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2012 20:10:06 +0100 (CET)
> > > From: "Ulrich Weigand"
> > >
> > > Hello,
> > >
> > > I noticed what appears to be a long-standing bug in generating
> > > .dwarf_frame
> > >
David Edelsohn wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 2:10 PM, Ulrich Weigand wrote:
>
> > So I'm wondering where to go from here. I guess we could:
> >
> > 1. Bring GCC (and gas) behaviour in compliance with the documented ABI
> >by removing the #undef DBX_REGISTER_NUMBER and changing gas's
> >
Mark Wielaard wrote:
> Which other unwinders are out there, that might rely on the current
> numbering?
Well, runtime unwinders using .eh_frame should be fine, since this
uses (and has always used) consistently the GCC numbering. I don't
know if there are other unwinders using .dwarf_frame ...
Mark Kettenis wrote:
> > Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2012 20:10:06 +0100 (CET)
> > From: "Ulrich Weigand"
> >
> > Hello,
> >
> > I noticed what appears to be a long-standing bug in generating .dwarf_frame
> > sections with GCC on Linux on PowerPC.
> >
> > ...
> >
> > So I'm wondering where to go from he
On Mon, 2012-11-26 at 20:10 +0100, Ulrich Weigand wrote:
> I noticed what appears to be a long-standing bug in generating .dwarf_frame
> sections with GCC on Linux on PowerPC.
>
> It had been my understanding that .dwarf_frame is supposed to differ from
> .eh_frame on PowerPC w.r.t. register numbe
> Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2012 20:10:06 +0100 (CET)
> From: "Ulrich Weigand"
>
> Hello,
>
> I noticed what appears to be a long-standing bug in generating .dwarf_frame
> sections with GCC on Linux on PowerPC.
>
> ...
>
> So I'm wondering where to go from here. I guess we could:
>
> 1. Bring GCC (a
On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 2:10 PM, Ulrich Weigand wrote:
> So I'm wondering where to go from here. I guess we could:
>
> 1. Bring GCC (and gas) behaviour in compliance with the documented ABI
>by removing the #undef DBX_REGISTER_NUMBER and changing gas's
>md_reg_eh_frame_to_debug_frame to
Hello,
I noticed what appears to be a long-standing bug in generating .dwarf_frame
sections with GCC on Linux on PowerPC.
It had been my understanding that .dwarf_frame is supposed to differ from
.eh_frame on PowerPC w.r.t. register numbers: .eh_frame should use GCC
internal numbers, while .dwarf
