|
Message
From: Balint Cristian<rezso@r...>
Date: Mon Feb 21 16:16:27 CET 2005
Subject: [openrisc] x86_64 linux [more&more]
On Monday 21 February 2005 16:03, György 'nog' Jeney wrote:
> > > this is an interesting diff between i386 and x86-64 generated assembly...
> > > the 268435456 just happens to be 0x10000000, so it's the upper part of
> >
> > No, it takes the whole 64 bit part, not just the upper or lower.
> >
> > > 1152921504606846976. My really wild guess would be that some code assumes
> > > target register size = host register size...
> > Yes, something like. Would be nice to know where, and to constrain this to 32 bit lower part,
> > and ignore in rest. Who write these piece of code in /or32 ?
>
> If it is really that only the low 32 bits gets written to some 64-bit variable
> and the rest is left uninitialised, I would say that it is worth a try to run
> gcc through valgrind. It should pinpoint this error with ease.
Thanks !
I thinked to run via vallgrind, so i take a try this night !!
[Doh ... I will defeat this ! I wish to ...]
Olso i try to supervise the variabile via a "watch" in gdb, to see who touch it, where it is touched,
but at first try on x86_64 watchpoint not work for some reason [now finding out where i am wrong or really is a leak of gdb] :)),
but i will do a trik and will watch it over an i386 machine to find out all possible points where the field is touched in some manner.
Thanks for the idea.
> nog.
> _______________________________________________
> http://www.opencores.org/mailman/listinfo/openrisc
>
|
 |
Browse
