+2000-01-23 Richard Henderson <rth@cygnus.com>
+
+ * i386.c (dbx_register_map, svr4_dbx_register_map): New.
+ * i386.h (DBX_REGISTER_NUMBER): Use them.
+ * i386/beos-elf.h, i386/freebsd-elf.h, i386/i386elf.h: Likewise.
+ * i386/linux.h, i386/osfrose.h, i386/ptx4-i.h: Likewise.
+ * i386/rtemself.h, i386/sco5.h, i386/sysv4.h: Likewise.
+ * i386/sequent.h: Kill incorrect comment.
+
2000-01-23 Mark Mitchell <mark@codesourcery.com>
* ggc-page.c (struct page_entry): Make `context_depth' an
necessary when compiling PIC code. */
#define JUMP_TABLES_IN_TEXT_SECTION (flag_pic)
-/* Copy this from the svr4 specifications... */
-/* Define the register numbers to be used in Dwarf debugging information.
- The SVR4 reference port C compiler uses the following register numbers
- in its Dwarf output code:
- 0 for %eax (gnu regno = 0)
- 1 for %ecx (gnu regno = 2)
- 2 for %edx (gnu regno = 1)
- 3 for %ebx (gnu regno = 3)
- 4 for %esp (gnu regno = 7)
- 5 for %ebp (gnu regno = 6)
- 6 for %esi (gnu regno = 4)
- 7 for %edi (gnu regno = 5)
- The following three DWARF register numbers are never generated by
- the SVR4 C compiler or by the GNU compilers, but SDB on x86/svr4
- believes these numbers have these meanings.
- 8 for %eip (no gnu equivalent)
- 9 for %eflags (no gnu equivalent)
- 10 for %trapno (no gnu equivalent)
- It is not at all clear how we should number the FP stack registers
- for the x86 architecture. If the version of SDB on x86/svr4 were
- a bit less brain dead with respect to floating-point then we would
- have a precedent to follow with respect to DWARF register numbers
- for x86 FP registers, but the SDB on x86/svr4 is so completely
- broken with respect to FP registers that it is hardly worth thinking
- of it as something to strive for compatibility with.
- The version of x86/svr4 SDB I have at the moment does (partially)
- seem to believe that DWARF register number 11 is associated with
- the x86 register %st(0), but that's about all. Higher DWARF
- register numbers don't seem to be associated with anything in
- particular, and even for DWARF regno 11, SDB only seems to under-
- stand that it should say that a variable lives in %st(0) (when
- asked via an `=' command) if we said it was in DWARF regno 11,
- but SDB still prints garbage when asked for the value of the
- variable in question (via a `/' command).
- (Also note that the labels SDB prints for various FP stack regs
- when doing an `x' command are all wrong.)
- Note that these problems generally don't affect the native SVR4
- C compiler because it doesn't allow the use of -O with -g and
- because when it is *not* optimizing, it allocates a memory
- location for each floating-point variable, and the memory
- location is what gets described in the DWARF AT_location
- attribute for the variable in question.
- Regardless of the severe mental illness of the x86/svr4 SDB, we
- do something sensible here and we use the following DWARF
- register numbers. Note that these are all stack-top-relative
- numbers.
- 11 for %st(0) (gnu regno = 8)
- 12 for %st(1) (gnu regno = 9)
- 13 for %st(2) (gnu regno = 10)
- 14 for %st(3) (gnu regno = 11)
- 15 for %st(4) (gnu regno = 12)
- 16 for %st(5) (gnu regno = 13)
- 17 for %st(6) (gnu regno = 14)
- 18 for %st(7) (gnu regno = 15)
-*/
#undef DBX_REGISTER_NUMBER
-#define DBX_REGISTER_NUMBER(n) \
-((n) == 0 ? 0 \
- : (n) == 1 ? 2 \
- : (n) == 2 ? 1 \
- : (n) == 3 ? 3 \
- : (n) == 4 ? 6 \
- : (n) == 5 ? 7 \
- : (n) == 6 ? 5 \
- : (n) == 7 ? 4 \
- : ((n) >= FIRST_STACK_REG && (n) <= LAST_STACK_REG) ? (n)+3 \
- : (-1))
+#define DBX_REGISTER_NUMBER(n) svr4_dbx_register_map[n]
/* Output assembler code to FILE to increment profiler label # LABELNO
for profiling a function entry. */
necessary when compiling PIC code. */
#define JUMP_TABLES_IN_TEXT_SECTION (flag_pic)
-/* Copy this from the svr4 specifications... */
-/* Define the register numbers to be used in Dwarf debugging information.
- The SVR4 reference port C compiler uses the following register numbers
- in its Dwarf output code:
- 0 for %eax (gnu regno = 0)
- 1 for %ecx (gnu regno = 2)
- 2 for %edx (gnu regno = 1)
- 3 for %ebx (gnu regno = 3)
- 4 for %esp (gnu regno = 7)
- 5 for %ebp (gnu regno = 6)
- 6 for %esi (gnu regno = 4)
- 7 for %edi (gnu regno = 5)
- The following three DWARF register numbers are never generated by
- the SVR4 C compiler or by the GNU compilers, but SDB on x86/svr4
- believes these numbers have these meanings.
- 8 for %eip (no gnu equivalent)
- 9 for %eflags (no gnu equivalent)
- 10 for %trapno (no gnu equivalent)
- It is not at all clear how we should number the FP stack registers
- for the x86 architecture. If the version of SDB on x86/svr4 were
- a bit less brain dead with respect to floating-point then we would
- have a precedent to follow with respect to DWARF register numbers
- for x86 FP registers, but the SDB on x86/svr4 is so completely
- broken with respect to FP registers that it is hardly worth thinking
- of it as something to strive for compatibility with.
- The version of x86/svr4 SDB I have at the moment does (partially)
- seem to believe that DWARF register number 11 is associated with
- the x86 register %st(0), but that's about all. Higher DWARF
- register numbers don't seem to be associated with anything in
- particular, and even for DWARF regno 11, SDB only seems to under-
- stand that it should say that a variable lives in %st(0) (when
- asked via an `=' command) if we said it was in DWARF regno 11,
- but SDB still prints garbage when asked for the value of the
- variable in question (via a `/' command).
- (Also note that the labels SDB prints for various FP stack regs
- when doing an `x' command are all wrong.)
- Note that these problems generally don't affect the native SVR4
- C compiler because it doesn't allow the use of -O with -g and
- because when it is *not* optimizing, it allocates a memory
- location for each floating-point variable, and the memory
- location is what gets described in the DWARF AT_location
- attribute for the variable in question.
- Regardless of the severe mental illness of the x86/svr4 SDB, we
- do something sensible here and we use the following DWARF
- register numbers. Note that these are all stack-top-relative
- numbers.
- 11 for %st(0) (gnu regno = 8)
- 12 for %st(1) (gnu regno = 9)
- 13 for %st(2) (gnu regno = 10)
- 14 for %st(3) (gnu regno = 11)
- 15 for %st(4) (gnu regno = 12)
- 16 for %st(5) (gnu regno = 13)
- 17 for %st(6) (gnu regno = 14)
- 18 for %st(7) (gnu regno = 15)
-*/
#undef DBX_REGISTER_NUMBER
-#define DBX_REGISTER_NUMBER(n) \
-((n) == 0 ? 0 \
- : (n) == 1 ? 2 \
- : (n) == 2 ? 1 \
- : (n) == 3 ? 3 \
- : (n) == 4 ? 6 \
- : (n) == 5 ? 7 \
- : (n) == 6 ? 5 \
- : (n) == 7 ? 4 \
- : ((n) >= FIRST_STACK_REG && (n) <= LAST_STACK_REG) ? (n)+3 \
- : (-1))
+#define DBX_REGISTER_NUMBER(n) svr4_dbx_register_map[n]
/* Tell final.c that we don't need a label passed to mcount. */
FP_TOP_REG, FP_SECOND_REG, FLOAT_REGS, FLOAT_REGS,
FLOAT_REGS, FLOAT_REGS, FLOAT_REGS, FLOAT_REGS,
/* arg pointer */
- INDEX_REGS,
- /* flags, fpsr */
- NO_REGS, NO_REGS
+ NON_Q_REGS,
+ /* flags, fpsr, dirflag */
+ NO_REGS, NO_REGS, NO_REGS
};
+/* The "default" register map. */
+
+int const dbx_register_map[FIRST_PSEUDO_REGISTER] =
+{
+ 0, 2, 1, 3, 6, 7, 4, 5, /* general regs */
+ 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, /* fp regs */
+ -1, -1, -1, -1, /* arg, flags, fpsr, dir */
+};
+
+/* Define the register numbers to be used in Dwarf debugging information.
+ The SVR4 reference port C compiler uses the following register numbers
+ in its Dwarf output code:
+ 0 for %eax (gcc regno = 0)
+ 1 for %ecx (gcc regno = 2)
+ 2 for %edx (gcc regno = 1)
+ 3 for %ebx (gcc regno = 3)
+ 4 for %esp (gcc regno = 7)
+ 5 for %ebp (gcc regno = 6)
+ 6 for %esi (gcc regno = 4)
+ 7 for %edi (gcc regno = 5)
+ The following three DWARF register numbers are never generated by
+ the SVR4 C compiler or by the GNU compilers, but SDB on x86/svr4
+ believes these numbers have these meanings.
+ 8 for %eip (no gcc equivalent)
+ 9 for %eflags (gcc regno = 17)
+ 10 for %trapno (no gcc equivalent)
+ It is not at all clear how we should number the FP stack registers
+ for the x86 architecture. If the version of SDB on x86/svr4 were
+ a bit less brain dead with respect to floating-point then we would
+ have a precedent to follow with respect to DWARF register numbers
+ for x86 FP registers, but the SDB on x86/svr4 is so completely
+ broken with respect to FP registers that it is hardly worth thinking
+ of it as something to strive for compatibility with.
+ The version of x86/svr4 SDB I have at the moment does (partially)
+ seem to believe that DWARF register number 11 is associated with
+ the x86 register %st(0), but that's about all. Higher DWARF
+ register numbers don't seem to be associated with anything in
+ particular, and even for DWARF regno 11, SDB only seems to under-
+ stand that it should say that a variable lives in %st(0) (when
+ asked via an `=' command) if we said it was in DWARF regno 11,
+ but SDB still prints garbage when asked for the value of the
+ variable in question (via a `/' command).
+ (Also note that the labels SDB prints for various FP stack regs
+ when doing an `x' command are all wrong.)
+ Note that these problems generally don't affect the native SVR4
+ C compiler because it doesn't allow the use of -O with -g and
+ because when it is *not* optimizing, it allocates a memory
+ location for each floating-point variable, and the memory
+ location is what gets described in the DWARF AT_location
+ attribute for the variable in question.
+ Regardless of the severe mental illness of the x86/svr4 SDB, we
+ do something sensible here and we use the following DWARF
+ register numbers. Note that these are all stack-top-relative
+ numbers.
+ 11 for %st(0) (gcc regno = 8)
+ 12 for %st(1) (gcc regno = 9)
+ 13 for %st(2) (gcc regno = 10)
+ 14 for %st(3) (gcc regno = 11)
+ 15 for %st(4) (gcc regno = 12)
+ 16 for %st(5) (gcc regno = 13)
+ 17 for %st(6) (gcc regno = 14)
+ 18 for %st(7) (gcc regno = 15)
+*/
+int const svr4_dbx_register_map[FIRST_PSEUDO_REGISTER] =
+{
+ 0, 2, 1, 3, 6, 7, 5, 4, /* general regs */
+ 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, /* fp regs */
+ -1, 9, -1, -1, /* arg, flags, fpsr, dir */
+};
+
+
+
/* Test and compare insns in i386.md store the information needed to
generate branch and scc insns here. */
/* How to renumber registers for dbx and gdb. */
-/* {0,2,1,3,6,7,4,5,12,13,14,15,16,17} */
-#define DBX_REGISTER_NUMBER(n) \
-((n) == 0 ? 0 : \
- (n) == 1 ? 2 : \
- (n) == 2 ? 1 : \
- (n) == 3 ? 3 : \
- (n) == 4 ? 6 : \
- (n) == 5 ? 7 : \
- (n) == 6 ? 4 : \
- (n) == 7 ? 5 : \
- (n) + 4)
+#define DBX_REGISTER_NUMBER(n) dbx_register_map[n]
+
+extern int const dbx_register_map[FIRST_PSEUDO_REGISTER];
+extern int const svr4_dbx_register_map[FIRST_PSEUDO_REGISTER];
/* Before the prologue, RA is at 0(%esp). */
#define INCOMING_RETURN_ADDR_RTX \
fprintf (FILE, "\t.version\t\"01.01\"\n"); \
} while (0)
-/* Define the register numbers to be used in Dwarf debugging information.
- The SVR4 reference port C compiler uses the following register numbers
- in its Dwarf output code:
-
- 0 for %eax (gnu regno = 0)
- 1 for %ecx (gnu regno = 2)
- 2 for %edx (gnu regno = 1)
- 3 for %ebx (gnu regno = 3)
- 4 for %esp (gnu regno = 7)
- 5 for %ebp (gnu regno = 6)
- 6 for %esi (gnu regno = 4)
- 7 for %edi (gnu regno = 5)
-
- The following three DWARF register numbers are never generated by
- the SVR4 C compiler or by the GNU compilers, but SDB on x86/svr4
- believes these numbers have these meanings.
-
- 8 for %eip (no gnu equivalent)
- 9 for %eflags (no gnu equivalent)
- 10 for %trapno (no gnu equivalent)
-
- It is not at all clear how we should number the FP stack registers
- for the x86 architecture. If the version of SDB on x86/svr4 were
- a bit less brain dead with respect to floating-point then we would
- have a precedent to follow with respect to DWARF register numbers
- for x86 FP registers, but the SDB on x86/svr4 is so completely
- broken with respect to FP registers that it is hardly worth thinking
- of it as something to strive for compatibility with.
-
- The verison of x86/svr4 SDB I have at the moment does (partially)
- seem to believe that DWARF register number 11 is associated with
- the x86 register %st(0), but that's about all. Higher DWARF
- register numbers don't seem to be associated with anything in
- particular, and even for DWARF regno 11, SDB only seems to under-
- stand that it should say that a variable lives in %st(0) (when
- asked via an `=' command) if we said it was in DWARF regno 11,
- but SDB still prints garbage when asked for the value of the
- variable in question (via a `/' command).
-
- (Also note that the labels SDB prints for various FP stack regs
- when doing an `x' command are all wrong.)
-
- Note that these problems generally don't affect the native SVR4
- C compiler because it doesn't allow the use of -O with -g and
- because when it is *not* optimizing, it allocates a memory
- location for each floating-point variable, and the memory
- location is what gets described in the DWARF AT_location
- attribute for the variable in question.
-
- Regardless of the severe mental illness of the x86/svr4 SDB, we
- do something sensible here and we use the following DWARF
- register numbers. Note that these are all stack-top-relative
- numbers.
-
- 11 for %st(0) (gnu regno = 8)
- 12 for %st(1) (gnu regno = 9)
- 13 for %st(2) (gnu regno = 10)
- 14 for %st(3) (gnu regno = 11)
- 15 for %st(4) (gnu regno = 12)
- 16 for %st(5) (gnu regno = 13)
- 17 for %st(6) (gnu regno = 14)
- 18 for %st(7) (gnu regno = 15)
-*/
-
#undef DBX_REGISTER_NUMBER
-#define DBX_REGISTER_NUMBER(n) \
-((n) == 0 ? 0 \
- : (n) == 1 ? 2 \
- : (n) == 2 ? 1 \
- : (n) == 3 ? 3 \
- : (n) == 4 ? 6 \
- : (n) == 5 ? 7 \
- : (n) == 6 ? 5 \
- : (n) == 7 ? 4 \
- : ((n) >= FIRST_STACK_REG && (n) <= LAST_STACK_REG) ? (n)+3 \
- : (-1))
+#define DBX_REGISTER_NUMBER(n) svr4_dbx_register_map[n]
/* The routine used to output sequences of byte values. We use a special
version of this for most svr4 targets because doing so makes the
necessary when compiling PIC code. */
#define JUMP_TABLES_IN_TEXT_SECTION (flag_pic)
-/* Copy this from the svr4 specifications... */
-/* Define the register numbers to be used in Dwarf debugging information.
- The SVR4 reference port C compiler uses the following register numbers
- in its Dwarf output code:
- 0 for %eax (gnu regno = 0)
- 1 for %ecx (gnu regno = 2)
- 2 for %edx (gnu regno = 1)
- 3 for %ebx (gnu regno = 3)
- 4 for %esp (gnu regno = 7)
- 5 for %ebp (gnu regno = 6)
- 6 for %esi (gnu regno = 4)
- 7 for %edi (gnu regno = 5)
- The following three DWARF register numbers are never generated by
- the SVR4 C compiler or by the GNU compilers, but SDB on x86/svr4
- believes these numbers have these meanings.
- 8 for %eip (no gnu equivalent)
- 9 for %eflags (no gnu equivalent)
- 10 for %trapno (no gnu equivalent)
- It is not at all clear how we should number the FP stack registers
- for the x86 architecture. If the version of SDB on x86/svr4 were
- a bit less brain dead with respect to floating-point then we would
- have a precedent to follow with respect to DWARF register numbers
- for x86 FP registers, but the SDB on x86/svr4 is so completely
- broken with respect to FP registers that it is hardly worth thinking
- of it as something to strive for compatibility with.
- The version of x86/svr4 SDB I have at the moment does (partially)
- seem to believe that DWARF register number 11 is associated with
- the x86 register %st(0), but that's about all. Higher DWARF
- register numbers don't seem to be associated with anything in
- particular, and even for DWARF regno 11, SDB only seems to under-
- stand that it should say that a variable lives in %st(0) (when
- asked via an `=' command) if we said it was in DWARF regno 11,
- but SDB still prints garbage when asked for the value of the
- variable in question (via a `/' command).
- (Also note that the labels SDB prints for various FP stack regs
- when doing an `x' command are all wrong.)
- Note that these problems generally don't affect the native SVR4
- C compiler because it doesn't allow the use of -O with -g and
- because when it is *not* optimizing, it allocates a memory
- location for each floating-point variable, and the memory
- location is what gets described in the DWARF AT_location
- attribute for the variable in question.
- Regardless of the severe mental illness of the x86/svr4 SDB, we
- do something sensible here and we use the following DWARF
- register numbers. Note that these are all stack-top-relative
- numbers.
- 11 for %st(0) (gnu regno = 8)
- 12 for %st(1) (gnu regno = 9)
- 13 for %st(2) (gnu regno = 10)
- 14 for %st(3) (gnu regno = 11)
- 15 for %st(4) (gnu regno = 12)
- 16 for %st(5) (gnu regno = 13)
- 17 for %st(6) (gnu regno = 14)
- 18 for %st(7) (gnu regno = 15)
-*/
#undef DBX_REGISTER_NUMBER
-#define DBX_REGISTER_NUMBER(n) \
-((n) == 0 ? 0 \
- : (n) == 1 ? 2 \
- : (n) == 2 ? 1 \
- : (n) == 3 ? 3 \
- : (n) == 4 ? 6 \
- : (n) == 5 ? 7 \
- : (n) == 6 ? 5 \
- : (n) == 7 ? 4 \
- : ((n) >= FIRST_STACK_REG && (n) <= LAST_STACK_REG) ? (n)+3 \
- : (-1))
+#define DBX_REGISTER_NUMBER(n) svr4_dbx_register_map[n]
/* Output assembler code to FILE to increment profiler label # LABELNO
for profiling a function entry. */
we want to retain compatibility with older gcc versions. */
#define DEFAULT_PCC_STRUCT_RETURN 0
-/* Map i386 registers to the numbers dwarf expects. Of course this is different
- from what stabs expects. */
-
-#define DWARF_DBX_REGISTER_NUMBER(n) \
-((n) == 0 ? 0 \
- : (n) == 1 ? 2 \
- : (n) == 2 ? 1 \
- : (n) == 3 ? 3 \
- : (n) == 4 ? 6 \
- : (n) == 5 ? 7 \
- : (n) == 6 ? 5 \
- : (n) == 7 ? 4 \
- : ((n) >= FIRST_STACK_REG && (n) <= LAST_STACK_REG) ? (n)+3 \
- : (-1))
-
-/* Now what stabs expects in the register. */
-#define STABS_DBX_REGISTER_NUMBER(n) \
-((n) == 0 ? 0 : \
- (n) == 1 ? 2 : \
- (n) == 2 ? 1 : \
- (n) == 3 ? 3 : \
- (n) == 4 ? 6 : \
- (n) == 5 ? 7 : \
- (n) == 6 ? 4 : \
- (n) == 7 ? 5 : \
- (n) + 4)
+/* Map i386 registers to the numbers dwarf expects. Of course this is
+ different from what stabs expects. */
#undef DBX_REGISTER_NUMBER
-#define DBX_REGISTER_NUMBER(n) ((write_symbols == DWARF_DEBUG) \
- ? DWARF_DBX_REGISTER_NUMBER(n) \
- : STABS_DBX_REGISTER_NUMBER(n))
+#define DBX_REGISTER_NUMBER(n) ((write_symbols == DWARF_DEBUG) \
+ ? svr4_dbx_register_map[n] \
+ : dbx_register_map[n])
fprintf (FILE, "\t.version\t\"01.01\"\n"); \
} while (0)
-/* Define the register numbers to be used in Dwarf debugging information.
- The SVR4 reference port C compiler uses the following register numbers
- in its Dwarf output code:
-
- 0 for %eax (gnu regno = 0)
- 1 for %ecx (gnu regno = 2)
- 2 for %edx (gnu regno = 1)
- 3 for %ebx (gnu regno = 3)
- 4 for %esp (gnu regno = 7)
- 5 for %ebp (gnu regno = 6)
- 6 for %esi (gnu regno = 4)
- 7 for %edi (gnu regno = 5)
-
- The following three DWARF register numbers are never generated by
- the SVR4 C compiler or by the GNU compilers, but SDB on x86/svr4
- believes these numbers have these meanings.
-
- 8 for %eip (no gnu equivalent)
- 9 for %eflags (no gnu equivalent)
- 10 for %trapno (no gnu equivalent)
-
- It is not at all clear how we should number the FP stack registers
- for the x86 architecture. If the version of SDB on x86/svr4 were
- a bit less brain dead with respect to floating-point then we would
- have a precedent to follow with respect to DWARF register numbers
- for x86 FP registers, but the SDB on x86/svr4 is so completely
- broken with respect to FP registers that it is hardly worth thinking
- of it as something to strive for compatibility with.
-
- The version of x86/svr4 SDB I have at the moment does (partially)
- seem to believe that DWARF register number 11 is associated with
- the x86 register %st(0), but that's about all. Higher DWARF
- register numbers don't seem to be associated with anything in
- particular, and even for DWARF regno 11, SDB only seems to under-
- stand that it should say that a variable lives in %st(0) (when
- asked via an `=' command) if we said it was in DWARF regno 11,
- but SDB still prints garbage when asked for the value of the
- variable in question (via a `/' command).
-
- (Also note that the labels SDB prints for various FP stack regs
- when doing an `x' command are all wrong.)
-
- Note that these problems generally don't affect the native SVR4
- C compiler because it doesn't allow the use of -O with -g and
- because when it is *not* optimizing, it allocates a memory
- location for each floating-point variable, and the memory
- location is what gets described in the DWARF AT_location
- attribute for the variable in question.
-
- Regardless of the severe mental illness of the x86/svr4 SDB, we
- do something sensible here and we use the following DWARF
- register numbers. Note that these are all stack-top-relative
- numbers.
-
- 11 for %st(0) (gnu regno = 8)
- 12 for %st(1) (gnu regno = 9)
- 13 for %st(2) (gnu regno = 10)
- 14 for %st(3) (gnu regno = 11)
- 15 for %st(4) (gnu regno = 12)
- 16 for %st(5) (gnu regno = 13)
- 17 for %st(6) (gnu regno = 14)
- 18 for %st(7) (gnu regno = 15)
-*/
-
#undef DBX_REGISTER_NUMBER
-#define DBX_REGISTER_NUMBER(n) \
-((n) == 0 ? 0 \
- : (n) == 1 ? 2 \
- : (n) == 2 ? 1 \
- : (n) == 3 ? 3 \
- : (n) == 4 ? 6 \
- : (n) == 5 ? 7 \
- : (n) == 6 ? 5 \
- : (n) == 7 ? 4 \
- : ((n) >= FIRST_STACK_REG && (n) <= LAST_STACK_REG) ? (n)+3 \
- : (-1))
+#define DBX_REGISTER_NUMBER(n) svr4_dbx_register_map[n]
/* The routine used to output sequences of byte values. We use a special
version of this for most svr4 targets because doing so makes the
necessary when compiling PIC code. */
#define JUMP_TABLES_IN_TEXT_SECTION (flag_pic)
-/* Copy this from the svr4 specifications... */
-/* Define the register numbers to be used in Dwarf debugging information.
- The SVR4 reference port C compiler uses the following register numbers
- in its Dwarf output code:
- 0 for %eax (gnu regno = 0)
- 1 for %ecx (gnu regno = 2)
- 2 for %edx (gnu regno = 1)
- 3 for %ebx (gnu regno = 3)
- 4 for %esp (gnu regno = 7)
- 5 for %ebp (gnu regno = 6)
- 6 for %esi (gnu regno = 4)
- 7 for %edi (gnu regno = 5)
- The following three DWARF register numbers are never generated by
- the SVR4 C compiler or by the GNU compilers, but SDB on x86/svr4
- believes these numbers have these meanings.
- 8 for %eip (no gnu equivalent)
- 9 for %eflags (no gnu equivalent)
- 10 for %trapno (no gnu equivalent)
- It is not at all clear how we should number the FP stack registers
- for the x86 architecture. If the version of SDB on x86/svr4 were
- a bit less brain dead with respect to floating-point then we would
- have a precedent to follow with respect to DWARF register numbers
- for x86 FP registers, but the SDB on x86/svr4 is so completely
- broken with respect to FP registers that it is hardly worth thinking
- of it as something to strive for compatibility with.
- The version of x86/svr4 SDB I have at the moment does (partially)
- seem to believe that DWARF register number 11 is associated with
- the x86 register %st(0), but that's about all. Higher DWARF
- register numbers don't seem to be associated with anything in
- particular, and even for DWARF regno 11, SDB only seems to under-
- stand that it should say that a variable lives in %st(0) (when
- asked via an `=' command) if we said it was in DWARF regno 11,
- but SDB still prints garbage when asked for the value of the
- variable in question (via a `/' command).
- (Also note that the labels SDB prints for various FP stack regs
- when doing an `x' command are all wrong.)
- Note that these problems generally don't affect the native SVR4
- C compiler because it doesn't allow the use of -O with -g and
- because when it is *not* optimizing, it allocates a memory
- location for each floating-point variable, and the memory
- location is what gets described in the DWARF AT_location
- attribute for the variable in question.
- Regardless of the severe mental illness of the x86/svr4 SDB, we
- do something sensible here and we use the following DWARF
- register numbers. Note that these are all stack-top-relative
- numbers.
- 11 for %st(0) (gnu regno = 8)
- 12 for %st(1) (gnu regno = 9)
- 13 for %st(2) (gnu regno = 10)
- 14 for %st(3) (gnu regno = 11)
- 15 for %st(4) (gnu regno = 12)
- 16 for %st(5) (gnu regno = 13)
- 17 for %st(6) (gnu regno = 14)
- 18 for %st(7) (gnu regno = 15)
-*/
#undef DBX_REGISTER_NUMBER
-#define DBX_REGISTER_NUMBER(n) \
-((n) == 0 ? 0 \
- : (n) == 1 ? 2 \
- : (n) == 2 ? 1 \
- : (n) == 3 ? 3 \
- : (n) == 4 ? 6 \
- : (n) == 5 ? 7 \
- : (n) == 6 ? 5 \
- : (n) == 7 ? 4 \
- : ((n) >= FIRST_STACK_REG && (n) <= LAST_STACK_REG) ? (n)+3 \
- : (-1))
+#define DBX_REGISTER_NUMBER(n) svr4_dbx_register_map[n]
/* Output assembler code to FILE to increment profiler label # LABELNO
for profiling a function entry. */
#define DBX_FUNCTION_FIRST 1
#undef DBX_REGISTER_NUMBER
-#define DBX_REGISTER_NUMBER(n) \
-((TARGET_ELF) ? \
- ((n) == 0 ? 0 \
- : (n) == 1 ? 2 \
- : (n) == 2 ? 1 \
- : (n) == 3 ? 3 \
- : (n) == 4 ? 6 \
- : (n) == 5 ? 7 \
- : (n) == 6 ? 5 \
- : (n) == 7 ? 4 \
- : ((n) >= FIRST_STACK_REG && (n) <= LAST_STACK_REG) ? (n)+3 \
- : (-1)) \
- : \
- ((n) == 0 ? 0 : \
- (n) == 1 ? 2 : \
- (n) == 2 ? 1 : \
- (n) == 3 ? 3 : \
- (n) == 4 ? 6 : \
- (n) == 5 ? 7 : \
- (n) == 6 ? 4 : \
- (n) == 7 ? 5 : \
- (n) + 4))
+#define DBX_REGISTER_NUMBER(n) \
+ ((TARGET_ELF) ? svr4_dbx_register_map[n] : dbx_register_map[n])
#undef DWARF_DEBUGGING_INFO
#undef SDB_DEBUGGING_INFO
* dbx order is ax, dx, cx, st(0), st(1), bx, si, di, st(2), st(3),
* st(4), st(5), st(6), st(7), sp, bp */
-/* ??? The right thing would be to change the ordering of the
- registers to correspond to the conventions of this system,
- and get rid of DBX_REGISTER_NUMBER. */
-
#undef DBX_REGISTER_NUMBER
#define DBX_REGISTER_NUMBER(n) \
((n) < 3 ? (n) : (n) < 6 ? (n) + 2 \
fprintf (FILE, "\t.version\t\"01.01\"\n"); \
} while (0)
-/* Define the register numbers to be used in Dwarf debugging information.
- The SVR4 reference port C compiler uses the following register numbers
- in its Dwarf output code:
-
- 0 for %eax (gnu regno = 0)
- 1 for %ecx (gnu regno = 2)
- 2 for %edx (gnu regno = 1)
- 3 for %ebx (gnu regno = 3)
- 4 for %esp (gnu regno = 7)
- 5 for %ebp (gnu regno = 6)
- 6 for %esi (gnu regno = 4)
- 7 for %edi (gnu regno = 5)
-
- The following three DWARF register numbers are never generated by
- the SVR4 C compiler or by the GNU compilers, but SDB on x86/svr4
- believes these numbers have these meanings.
-
- 8 for %eip (no gnu equivalent)
- 9 for %eflags (no gnu equivalent)
- 10 for %trapno (no gnu equivalent)
-
- It is not at all clear how we should number the FP stack registers
- for the x86 architecture. If the version of SDB on x86/svr4 were
- a bit less brain dead with respect to floating-point then we would
- have a precedent to follow with respect to DWARF register numbers
- for x86 FP registers, but the SDB on x86/svr4 is so completely
- broken with respect to FP registers that it is hardly worth thinking
- of it as something to strive for compatibility with.
-
- The version of x86/svr4 SDB I have at the moment does (partially)
- seem to believe that DWARF register number 11 is associated with
- the x86 register %st(0), but that's about all. Higher DWARF
- register numbers don't seem to be associated with anything in
- particular, and even for DWARF regno 11, SDB only seems to under-
- stand that it should say that a variable lives in %st(0) (when
- asked via an `=' command) if we said it was in DWARF regno 11,
- but SDB still prints garbage when asked for the value of the
- variable in question (via a `/' command).
-
- (Also note that the labels SDB prints for various FP stack regs
- when doing an `x' command are all wrong.)
-
- Note that these problems generally don't affect the native SVR4
- C compiler because it doesn't allow the use of -O with -g and
- because when it is *not* optimizing, it allocates a memory
- location for each floating-point variable, and the memory
- location is what gets described in the DWARF AT_location
- attribute for the variable in question.
-
- Regardless of the severe mental illness of the x86/svr4 SDB, we
- do something sensible here and we use the following DWARF
- register numbers. Note that these are all stack-top-relative
- numbers.
-
- 11 for %st(0) (gnu regno = 8)
- 12 for %st(1) (gnu regno = 9)
- 13 for %st(2) (gnu regno = 10)
- 14 for %st(3) (gnu regno = 11)
- 15 for %st(4) (gnu regno = 12)
- 16 for %st(5) (gnu regno = 13)
- 17 for %st(6) (gnu regno = 14)
- 18 for %st(7) (gnu regno = 15)
-*/
-
#undef DBX_REGISTER_NUMBER
-#define DBX_REGISTER_NUMBER(n) \
-((n) == 0 ? 0 \
- : (n) == 1 ? 2 \
- : (n) == 2 ? 1 \
- : (n) == 3 ? 3 \
- : (n) == 4 ? 6 \
- : (n) == 5 ? 7 \
- : (n) == 6 ? 5 \
- : (n) == 7 ? 4 \
- : ((n) >= FIRST_STACK_REG && (n) <= LAST_STACK_REG) ? (n)+3 \
- : (-1))
+#define DBX_REGISTER_NUMBER(n) svr4_dbx_register_map[n]
/* The routine used to output sequences of byte values. We use a special
version of this for most svr4 targets because doing so makes the
projects / platform / upstream / linaro-gcc.git / commitdiff