On 2012-03-16 16:57, Jason Wessel wrote: > On 03/16/2012 07:17 AM, Jan Kiszka wrote: >> Even if the content is always 0, gdb expects us to return also ds, >> es, fs, and gs while in x86-64 mode. Do this to avoid ugly errors on >> "info registers". >> >> Signed-off-by: Jan Kiszka <[email protected]> >> --- >> arch/x86/include/asm/kgdb.h | 6 +++++- >> arch/x86/kernel/kgdb.c | 6 ++++-- >> 2 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/kgdb.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/kgdb.h >> index 77e95f5..e857f1a 100644 >> --- a/arch/x86/include/asm/kgdb.h >> +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/kgdb.h >> @@ -64,9 +64,13 @@ enum regnames { >> GDB_PS, /* 17 */ >> GDB_CS, /* 18 */ >> GDB_SS, /* 19 */ >> + GDB_DS, /* 20 */ >> + GDB_ES, /* 21 */ >> + GDB_FS, /* 22 */ >> + GDB_GS, /* 23 */ >> }; >> #define GDB_ORIG_AX 57 >> -#define DBG_MAX_REG_NUM 20 >> +#define DBG_MAX_REG_NUM 24 >> /* 17 64 bit regs and 3 32 bit regs */ >> #define NUMREGBYTES ((17 * 8) + (3 * 4)) > > You bumped the register numbers correctly, but you also need to add the > correct padding to the NUMREGBYTES or you might not get a large enough memory > block for the register struct. > > You added 2 32 bit regs, so it should change to: > > /* 17 64 bit regs and 5 32 bit regs */ > #define NUMREGBYTES ((17 * 8) + (5 * 4)) >
Oops. Most probably explains the random gs content I saw these days in a 64-bit debugging session. > > The rest should be fine. I can test this and add it to the merge queue with > the NUMREGBYTES change, unless you disagree. I don't disagree. :) Thanks, Jan -- Siemens AG, Corporate Technology, CT T DE IT 1 Corporate Competence Center Embedded Linux ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ This SF email is sponsosred by: Try Windows Azure free for 90 days Click Here http://p.sf.net/sfu/sfd2d-msazure _______________________________________________ Kgdb-bugreport mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/kgdb-bugreport
