aboutsummaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/gdb/testsuite/gdb.arch/amd64-tailcall-self.S
AgeCommit message (Collapse)AuthorFilesLines
2024-01-12Update copyright year range in header of all files managed by GDBAndrew Burgess1-1/+1
This commit is the result of the following actions: - Running gdb/copyright.py to update all of the copyright headers to include 2024, - Manually updating a few files the copyright.py script told me to update, these files had copyright headers embedded within the file, - Regenerating gdbsupport/Makefile.in to refresh it's copyright date, - Using grep to find other files that still mentioned 2023. If these files were updated last year from 2022 to 2023 then I've updated them this year to 2024. I'm sure I've probably missed some dates. Feel free to fix them up as you spot them.
2023-01-01Update copyright year range in header of all files managed by GDBJoel Brobecker1-1/+1
This commit is the result of running the gdb/copyright.py script, which automated the update of the copyright year range for all source files managed by the GDB project to be updated to include year 2023.
2022-10-25[gdb/testsuite] Handle missing .note.GNU-stackTom de Vries1-0/+1
On openSUSE Tumbleweed I run into this for the dwarf assembly test-cases, and some hardcoded assembly test-cases: ... Running gdb.dwarf2/fission-absolute-dwo.exp ... gdb compile failed, ld: warning: fission-absolute-dwo.o: \ missing .note.GNU-stack section implies executable stack ld: NOTE: This behaviour is deprecated and will be removed in a future \ version of the linker === gdb Summary === # of untested testcases 1 ... Fix the dwarf assembly test-cases by adding the missing .note.GNU-stack in proc Dwarf::assemble. Fix the hard-coded test-cases using this command: ... $ for f in $(find gdb/testsuite/gdb.* -name *.S); do if ! grep -q note.GNU-stack $f; then echo -e "\t.section\t.note.GNU-stack,\"\",@progbits" >> $f; fi; done ... Likewise for .s files, and gdb/testsuite/lib/my-syscalls.S. The idiom for arm seems to be to use %progbits instead, see commit 9a5911c08be ("gdb/testsuite/gdb.dwarf2: Replace @ with % for ARM compatability"), so hand-edit gdb/testsuite/gdb.arch/arm-disp-step.S to use %progbits instead. Note that dwarf assembly testcases use %progbits as decided by proc _section. Tested on x86_64-linux. Bug: https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29674
2022-01-01Automatic Copyright Year update after running gdb/copyright.pyJoel Brobecker1-1/+1
This commit brings all the changes made by running gdb/copyright.py as per GDB's Start of New Year Procedure. For the avoidance of doubt, all changes in this commits were performed by the script.
2021-01-01Update copyright year range in all GDB filesJoel Brobecker1-1/+1
This commits the result of running gdb/copyright.py as per our Start of New Year procedure... gdb/ChangeLog Update copyright year range in copyright header of all GDB files.
2020-01-01Update copyright year range in all GDB files.Joel Brobecker1-1/+1
gdb/ChangeLog: Update copyright year range in all GDB files.
2019-05-09[gdb/testsuite] Fix gdb.arch/amd64-tailcall-self.STom de Vries1-12/+12
The test-case gdb.arch/amd64-tailcall-self.exp fails here: ... if ![runto b] { return -1 } ... like: ... (gdb) file build/gdb/testsuite/outputs/gdb.arch/amd64-tailcall-self/\ amd64-tailcall-self Reading symbols from build/gdb/testsuite/outputs/gdb.arch/\ amd64-tailcall-self/amd64-tailcall-self... Dwarf Error: Cannot find DIE at 0x1f5 referenced from DIE at 0x107 [in \ module build/gdb/testsuite/outputs/gdb.arch/amd64-tailcall-self/\ amd64-tailcall-self] ... The problem is that in amd64-tailcall-self.S, CU-relative references are assigned .debug_info section relative values. [ This is similar to the problem fixed by "Fix gdb.arch/amd64-entry-value-paramref.S". ] Fix this by assigning CU-relative references instead. Tested on x86_64-linux. gdb/testsuite/ChangeLog: 2019-05-09 Tom de Vries <tdevries@suse.de> * gdb.arch/amd64-tailcall-self.S: Make DW_FORM_ref4 references CU-relative.
2019-01-01Update copyright year range in all GDB files.Joel Brobecker1-1/+1
This commit applies all changes made after running the gdb/copyright.py script. Note that one file was flagged by the script, due to an invalid copyright header (gdb/unittests/basic_string_view/element_access/char/empty.cc). As the file was copied from GCC's libstdc++-v3 testsuite, this commit leaves this file untouched for the time being; a patch to fix the header was sent to gcc-patches first. gdb/ChangeLog: Update copyright year range in all GDB files.
2018-01-02Update copyright year range in all GDB filesJoel Brobecker1-1/+1
gdb/ChangeLog: Update copyright year range in all GDB files
2017-01-01update copyright year range in GDB filesJoel Brobecker1-1/+1
This applies the second part of GDB's End of Year Procedure, which updates the copyright year range in all of GDB's files. gdb/ChangeLog: Update copyright year range in all GDB files.
2016-01-01GDB copyright headers update after running GDB's copyright.py script.Joel Brobecker1-1/+1
gdb/ChangeLog: Update year range in copyright notice of all files.
2015-06-01PR symtab/18392Jan Kratochvil1-0/+614
Initially there is some chain (let's say the longest one but that doe snot matter). Consequently its elements from the middle are being removed and there remains only some few unambiguous top and bottom ones. The original idea why the comparison should be sharp ("<") was that if there are multiple chains like (0xaddr show jmp instruction address): main(0x100) -> a(0x200) -> d(0x400) main(0x100) -> a(0x200) -> c(0x300) -> d(0x400) then - such situation cannot exist - if two jmp instructions in "a" have the same address they must also jump to the same address (*). (*) jump to a computed address would be never considered for the DWARF tail-call records. So there could be: main(0x100) -> a(0x200) -> d(0x400) main(0x100) -> a(0x270) -> c(0x300) -> d(0x400) But then "a" frame itself is ambiguous and it must not be displayed. I did not realize that there can be self-tail-call: main(0x100) -> a(0x200) -> d(0x400) main(0x100) -> a(0x280) -> a(0x200) -> d(0x400) which intersects to: main(0x100) -> <???>? -> a(0x200) -> d(0x400) And so if the first chain was chosen the main(0x100) -> a(0x200) -> d(0x400) then the final intersection has callers+callees==length. > for example, if CALLERS is 3 and > CALLEES is 2, what does the chain look like? main(0x100) -> x(0x150) -> y(0x200) -> <???>? -> a(0x200) -> d(0x400) And if LENGTH is 7 then: call_site[0] = main(0x100) call_site[1] = x(0x150) call_site[2] = y(0x200) call_site[3] = garbage call_site[4] = garbage call_site[5] = a(0x200) call_site[6] = d(0x400) gdb/ChangeLog 2015-06-01 Andreas Schwab <schwab@linux-m68k.org> Jan Kratochvil <jan.kratochvil@redhat.com> PR symtab/18392 * dwarf2-frame-tailcall.c (pretended_chain_levels): Correct assertion. * dwarf2loc.c (chain_candidate): Likewise. gdb/testsuite/ChangeLog 2015-06-01 Jan Kratochvil <jan.kratochvil@redhat.com> PR symtab/18392 * gdb.arch/amd64-tailcall-self.S: New file. * gdb.arch/amd64-tailcall-self.c: New file. * gdb.arch/amd64-tailcall-self.exp: New file.