From patchwork Mon Jan 7 18:27:26 2013 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Patchwork-Submitter: Steve Ellcey X-Patchwork-Id: 210030 Return-Path: X-Original-To: incoming@patchwork.ozlabs.org Delivered-To: patchwork-incoming@bilbo.ozlabs.org Received: from sourceware.org (server1.sourceware.org [209.132.180.131]) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 859862C0098 for ; Tue, 8 Jan 2013 05:27:52 +1100 (EST) Comment: DKIM? See http://www.dkim.org DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org; s=default; x=1358188072; h=Comment: DomainKey-Signature:Received:Received:Received:Received:Received: Received:Received:From:Date:To:Subject:User-Agent:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Message-ID:Mailing-List: Precedence:List-Id:List-Unsubscribe:List-Archive:List-Post: List-Help:Sender:Delivered-To; bh=v0G6+HjqeXd5mgACLb289ZKU80M=; b=o1QkuyIoY3hzg0F/q8tDQlXs0Jber3y7OlUHV03nvba3TJJdDZt9CQTYTnUQFu OOptMnrgpK8Gf57xRrl1ukqCxk3kw1aRwP35miDxl8NbK4y1N4rPzUgT7k0Rjyi1 +HCSFP6h/nN2QSeaJMUCYF0tO2mx/Pqt4yTLNcNIXO2WI= Comment: DomainKeys? See http://antispam.yahoo.com/domainkeys DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=default; d=gcc.gnu.org; h=Received:Received:X-SWARE-Spam-Status:X-Spam-Check-By:Received:Received:X-M-MSG:Received:Received:Received:From:Date:To:Subject:User-Agent:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Message-ID:X-EMS-Proccessed:X-EMS-STAMP:Mailing-List:Precedence:List-Id:List-Unsubscribe:List-Archive:List-Post:List-Help:Sender:Delivered-To; b=UXKOmAMEMZgNKhxGvBiR7vnwft8kuCCa/259byPhCXbYv5I3m2KAa528uYYlvn 5PUgi6/g68v5G+jLge/aR2SARlmnt/UV71HWynCVfcHjHc/vdWSLkZ083ZHQpUfh 3WAtTspqw3XNpb+s/933U+3F2LpUtkTe26n9H/rDxflTQ=; Received: (qmail 4657 invoked by alias); 7 Jan 2013 18:27:41 -0000 Received: (qmail 4636 invoked by uid 22791); 7 Jan 2013 18:27:39 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.4 required=5.0 tests=AWL, BAYES_00, RP_MATCHES_RCVD, TW_XF X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from dns1.mips.com (HELO dns1.mips.com) (12.201.5.69) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Mon, 07 Jan 2013 18:27:31 +0000 Received: from mailgate1.mips.com (mailgate1.mips.com [12.201.5.111]) by dns1.mips.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id r07IRUja030944 for ; Mon, 7 Jan 2013 10:27:30 -0800 X-M-MSG: Received: from exchdb01.mips.com (unknown [192.168.36.84]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mailgate1.mips.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2F4B636465B for ; Mon, 7 Jan 2013 10:27:30 -0800 (PST) Received: from ubuntu-sellcey.mips.com (192.168.65.53) by exchhub01.mips.com (192.168.36.84) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 14.2.247.3; Mon, 7 Jan 2013 10:27:26 -0800 Received: by ubuntu-sellcey.mips.com (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Mon, 07 Jan 2013 10:27:26 -0800 From: "Steve Ellcey " Date: Mon, 7 Jan 2013 10:27:26 -0800 To: Subject: [patch, mips, stabs] Do any MIPS targets use stabs? User-Agent: Heirloom mailx 12.4 7/29/08 MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-ID: <99d6779b-5dee-4fac-bc73-26055eaa0857@EXCHHUB01.MIPS.com> X-EMS-Proccessed: 6LP3oGfGVdcdb8o1aBnt6w== X-EMS-STAMP: r8NxdJp5BeQQEDAZHRhUJQ== Mailing-List: contact gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-patches-owner@gcc.gnu.org Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org While testing all the variations of my mips-mti-elf target I found that a number of debug tests like gcc.dg/debug/trivial.c fail when compiled using a stabs debug flag (-gstabs3 for example) and -mips16. While running the GNU simulator I get: mips-core: 1 byte read to unmapped address 0xffffe820 at 0xffffffff80020278 program stopped with signal 10 (User defined signal 1). FAIL: gcc.dg/debug/trivial.c -gstabs3 -O execution test Since I don't actually care about STABS I was looking at undefining DBX_DEBUGGING_INFO in mips-mti-elf.h and mips-mti-linux.h which makes the failures a moot point for me since I would no longer run the tests with any -stabs flags. But I was wondering, are there any MIPS targets that do use stabs? If not maybe we should just remove the define of DBX_DEBUGGING_INFO from mips.h instead of undefing it just for my targets. Opinions? I saw the discussion about removing STABS completely from GCC, etc. but it looks like there is still some users who want it on some targets. Here is my default patch which just undef's it for the mti targets. Steve Ellcey sellcey@mips.com 2013-01-07 Steve Ellcey * config/mips/mips-mti-elf.h: undef DBX_DEBUGGING_INFO. * config/mips/mips-mti-linux.h: Ditto. diff --git a/gcc/config/mips/mti-elf.h b/gcc/config/mips/mti-elf.h index f6b38a5..f90b060 100644 --- a/gcc/config/mips/mti-elf.h +++ b/gcc/config/mips/mti-elf.h @@ -41,3 +41,6 @@ along with GCC; see the file COPYING3. If not see \ /* Configuration-independent MIPS rules. */ \ BASE_DRIVER_SELF_SPECS + + +#undef DBX_DEBUGGING_INFO diff --git a/gcc/config/mips/mti-linux.h b/gcc/config/mips/mti-linux.h index cda9bdc..c12138f 100644 --- a/gcc/config/mips/mti-linux.h +++ b/gcc/config/mips/mti-linux.h @@ -45,3 +45,5 @@ along with GCC; see the file COPYING3. If not see \ /* Use the standard linux specs for everything else. */ \ LINUX64_DRIVER_SELF_SPECS + +#undef DBX_DEBUGGING_INFO