From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 17514 invoked by alias); 18 Nov 2005 15:08:35 -0000 Received: (qmail 17496 invoked by uid 22791); 18 Nov 2005 15:08:33 -0000 Received: from fra-del-01.spheriq.net (HELO fra-del-01.spheriq.net) (195.46.51.97) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.30-dev) with ESMTP; Fri, 18 Nov 2005 15:08:33 +0000 Received: from fra-out-02.spheriq.net (fra-out-02.spheriq.net [195.46.51.130]) by fra-del-01.spheriq.net with ESMTP id jAIF8IxT020196 for ; Fri, 18 Nov 2005 15:08:18 GMT Received: from fra-cus-01.spheriq.net (fra-cus-01.spheriq.net [195.46.51.37]) by fra-out-02.spheriq.net with ESMTP id jAIF8GxY003008 for ; Fri, 18 Nov 2005 15:08:17 GMT Received: from beta.dmz-eu.st.com (beta.dmz-eu.st.com [164.129.1.35]) by fra-cus-01.spheriq.net with ESMTP id jAIF8DgR019714 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=EDH-RSA-DES-CBC3-SHA bits=168 verify=OK); Fri, 18 Nov 2005 15:08:14 GMT Received: from zeta.dmz-eu.st.com (ns2.st.com [164.129.230.9]) by beta.dmz-eu.st.com (STMicroelectronics) with ESMTP id 8E6FADB0D; Fri, 18 Nov 2005 15:06:15 +0000 (GMT) Received: by zeta.dmz-eu.st.com (STMicroelectronics, from userid 60012) id 2148147426; Fri, 18 Nov 2005 15:09:15 +0000 (GMT) Received: from zeta.dmz-eu.st.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by zeta.dmz-eu.st.com (STMicroelectronics) with ESMTP id DB7AD75994; Fri, 18 Nov 2005 15:09:14 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail1.cro.st.com (mail1.cro.st.com [164.129.40.131]) by zeta.dmz-eu.st.com (STMicroelectronics) with ESMTP id DC589473D5; Fri, 18 Nov 2005 15:09:13 +0000 (GMT) Received: from crx549.cro.st.com (crx549.cro.st.com [164.129.44.49]) by mail1.cro.st.com (MOS 3.5.8-GR) with ESMTP id CGA42011 (AUTH "frederic riss"); Fri, 18 Nov 2005 16:06:09 +0100 (CET) Subject: Re: [RFC] DW_CFA_restore handling causes memory fault From: Frederic RISS To: Mark Kettenis Cc: jimb@red-bean.com, gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com In-Reply-To: <200511181345.jAIDjZNc026609@elgar.sibelius.xs4all.nl> References: <1132242850.8685.47.camel@crx549.cro.st.com> <8f2776cb0511171132x17fa4192u6ca5af71201e0be3@mail.gmail.com> <1132301881.8685.63.camel@crx549.cro.st.com> <8f2776cb0511180035ndadf290ta81520f75cf601d5@mail.gmail.com> <1132317183.8685.101.camel@crx549.cro.st.com> <200511181345.jAIDjZNc026609@elgar.sibelius.xs4all.nl> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Fri, 18 Nov 2005 15:55:00 -0000 Message-Id: <1132326367.8685.164.camel@crx549.cro.st.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-O-Spoofed: Not Scanned X-O-General-Status: No X-O-Spam1-Status: Not Scanned X-O-Spam2-Status: Not Scanned X-O-URL-Status: Not Scanned X-O-Virus1-Status: No X-O-Virus2-Status: Not Scanned X-O-Virus3-Status: No X-O-Virus4-Status: No X-O-Virus5-Status: Not Scanned X-O-Image-Status: Not Scanned X-O-Attach-Status: Not Scanned X-SpheriQ-Ver: 4.1.07 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2005-11/txt/msg00331.txt.bz2 On Fri, 2005-11-18 at 14:45 +0100, Mark Kettenis wrote: > > X-From_: gdb-patches-return-41536-m.m.kettenis=alumnus.utwente.nl@sourceware.org Fri Nov 18 13:38:27 2005 > > From: Frederic RISS > > Date: Fri, 18 Nov 2005 13:33:03 +0100 > > > > On Fri, 2005-11-18 at 00:35 -0800, Jim Blandy wrote: > > > Yes! But --- I apologize for not noticing this from the beginning --- > > > as I see your comment, it occurs to me that probably a call to > > > 'complaint' would be better than just a comment. Mark or Daniel can > > > string me up if they feel this will yield another 'incomplete CFI > > > data; unspecified blah blah blah' annoyance, but I think it's probably > > > the right thing. > > On the highest tree! Seriously though, if it turns out to be a major > annoyance, we can always do something about it later. So this is fine > to me ;-). Anyway, complaints are turned off by default, so I don't see how that could be a major annoyance to the lambda user. > > OK, third try attached. I mimiced the formatting of other complaints of > > the file. I didn't put the complaint in the 'else' clause, but added a > > check after the whole 'if', because an allocated register state isn't > > necessarily set to a correct value. > > That could possibly lead to two complaints about the same > "unspecified" register, but let's see what happens with this patch. Yes, the patch will produce a complaint in the DW_CFA_restore handling; and as a consequence of having an UNSPECIFIED register, the complaint in dwarf2_frame_cache will also trigger. > > Just a question: why are the i18n'ified strings formatted this way ? > > Formatted in what way? Starting in column 0? Well, that's because > it's easier to see whether the string will be longer than 80 > characters, which your string will be once the %s is filled in. Thanks for the explanation. > So > could you split the string over two lines? You're going to have to do > that anyway, because I'm going to ask you to make a little change: can > you also print the register number for the register that the complaint > is about? Initialy, I didn't put the register number because I felt there was an issue with the line going over 80 chars :-) Didn't think about the %s expansion, though... So what do you prefer to describe the register : its dwarf number, its gdb regnum or its name ? Cheers, Fred.