From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: (from majordomo@localhost) by oss.sgi.com (8.11.2/8.11.3) id f5BIPFJ17917 for linux-mips-outgoing; Mon, 11 Jun 2001 11:25:15 -0700 Received: from ftpbox.mot.com (ftpbox.mot.com [129.188.136.101]) by oss.sgi.com (8.11.2/8.11.3) with SMTP id f5BIPCV17906 for ; Mon, 11 Jun 2001 11:25:13 -0700 Received: [from pobox4.mot.com (pobox4.mot.com [10.64.251.243]) by ftpbox.mot.com (ftpbox 2.1) with ESMTP id LAA22787 for ; Mon, 11 Jun 2001 11:25:10 -0700 (MST)] Received: [from craius.cportcorp.com ([10.14.72.61]) by pobox4.mot.com (MOT-pobox4 2.0) with ESMTP id LAA05430 for ; Mon, 11 Jun 2001 11:25:10 -0700 (MST)] Received: from cportcorp.com (FRANZ [10.14.73.85]) by craius.cportcorp.com with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail Service Version 5.5.2650.21) id MTALJHMT; Mon, 11 Jun 2001 14:24:11 -0400 Message-ID: <3B250CF9.8C966EC9@cportcorp.com> Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2001 14:24:57 -0400 From: Bob Zulawnik X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (WinNT; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: hjl@lucon.org CC: gdb@sourceware.cygnus.com, binutils@sourceware.cygnus.com, linux-mips@oss.sgi.com Subject: Re: stabs or ecoff for Linux/mips Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux-mips@oss.sgi.com Precedence: bulk "H . J . Lu" wrote: > That matches my own experiences. In case you haven't noticed, I > have checked in patches to switch Linux/mips to stabs in ELF :-). For what it's worth : stabs format cannot express certain types of debug info that mdebug (used in ecoff) can. An example of that is so-called PDRs (Procedure Description Records) - they describe frame size, register masks etc.). Thus, in order to obtain information about a function (e.g. when setting a breakpoint at the entrance to a function), gdb has to resort to heuristics and read the function prolog, trying to figure out what registers are saved where, when is the frame setup complete etc. There are assumptions made in that gdb code (e.g. mips32_heuristic_proc_desc() and mips16_heuristic_proc_desc()) that have to match exactly what the compiler has done (as in "the occurrence of instruction 'x' signifies this"). Thus, using the stabs opens the debugger to potential misinterpretations of the code generated by the compiler (e.g. when a new type of frame is introduced, or maybe with some weird optimization). I understand that there are other arguments for using stabs and that dwarf2 is the long-term goal, this is just an FYI. Bob Zulawnik