espressif/binutils-gdb
1
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/espressif/binutils-gdb.git synced 2025-08-06 14:49:38 +08:00
Code Issues Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity

2007-11-07 Markus Deuling <deuling@de.ibm.com>

Browse Source 
* gdbarch.sh (legacy_virtual_frame_pointer): Add gdbarch parameter.
	* gdbarch.{c,h}: Regenerate.
	* arch-utils.c (legacy_virtual_frame_pointer): Add gdbarch parameter.
	Replace current_gdbarch by gdbarch.
	* m32c-tdep.c (m32c_virtual_frame_pointer): Likewise.
	* mips-tdep.c (mips_virtual_frame_pointer): Likewise.
	* spu-tdep.c (spu_virtual_frame_pointer): Likewise.
This commit is contained in:
Markus Deuling
2007-11-07 06:58:31 +00:00
parent 9970f04b03
commit a54fba4c5d
8 changed files with 32 additions and 19 deletions
Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

19
gdb/arch-utils.c
View File

@ -135,7 +135,8 @@ cannot_register_not (int regnum)
raw. */
void
legacy_virtual_frame_pointer (CORE_ADDR pc,
legacy_virtual_frame_pointer (struct gdbarch *gdbarch,
CORE_ADDR pc,
int *frame_regnum,
LONGEST *frame_offset)
{
@ -144,14 +145,14 @@ legacy_virtual_frame_pointer (CORE_ADDR pc,
register and an offset can determine this. I think it should
instead generate a byte code expression as that would work better
with things like Dwarf2's CFI. */
if (gdbarch_deprecated_fp_regnum (current_gdbarch) >= 0
&& gdbarch_deprecated_fp_regnum (current_gdbarch)
< gdbarch_num_regs (current_gdbarch))
*frame_regnum = gdbarch_deprecated_fp_regnum (current_gdbarch);
else if (gdbarch_sp_regnum (current_gdbarch) >= 0
&& gdbarch_sp_regnum (current_gdbarch)
< gdbarch_num_regs (current_gdbarch))
*frame_regnum = gdbarch_sp_regnum (current_gdbarch);
if (gdbarch_deprecated_fp_regnum (gdbarch) >= 0
&& gdbarch_deprecated_fp_regnum (gdbarch)
< gdbarch_num_regs (gdbarch))
*frame_regnum = gdbarch_deprecated_fp_regnum (gdbarch);
else if (gdbarch_sp_regnum (gdbarch) >= 0
&& gdbarch_sp_regnum (gdbarch)
< gdbarch_num_regs (gdbarch))
*frame_regnum = gdbarch_sp_regnum (gdbarch);
else
/* Should this be an internal error? I guess so, it is reflecting
an architectural limitation in the current design. */