From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 23957 invoked by alias); 16 May 2006 22:46:11 -0000 Received: (qmail 23948 invoked by uid 22791); 16 May 2006 22:46:11 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from e6.ny.us.ibm.com (HELO e6.ny.us.ibm.com) (32.97.182.146) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Tue, 16 May 2006 22:46:02 +0000 Received: from d01relay04.pok.ibm.com (d01relay04.pok.ibm.com [9.56.227.236]) by e6.ny.us.ibm.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id k4GMk08P015330 for ; Tue, 16 May 2006 18:46:00 -0400 Received: from d01av04.pok.ibm.com (d01av04.pok.ibm.com [9.56.224.64]) by d01relay04.pok.ibm.com (8.12.10/NCO/VER6.8) with ESMTP id k4GMjx5B240862 for ; Tue, 16 May 2006 18:45:59 -0400 Received: from d01av04.pok.ibm.com (loopback [127.0.0.1]) by d01av04.pok.ibm.com (8.12.11/8.13.3) with ESMTP id k4GMjx5r005299 for ; Tue, 16 May 2006 18:45:59 -0400 Received: from dufur.beaverton.ibm.com (dufur.beaverton.ibm.com [9.47.22.20]) by d01av04.pok.ibm.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id k4GMjwWj005263; Tue, 16 May 2006 18:45:58 -0400 Subject: Re: [RFC] Move the frame zero PC check earlier From: PAUL GILLIAM Reply-To: pgilliam@us.ibm.com To: Daniel Jacobowitz Cc: Mark Kettenis , gdb-patches@sourceware.org In-Reply-To: <20060516221837.GA15617@nevyn.them.org> References: <20060510180312.GA12606@nevyn.them.org> <200605130946.k4D9kZ2M001331@elgar.sibelius.xs4all.nl> <20060513151338.GB3721@nevyn.them.org> <200605131642.k4DGgiqa018273@elgar.sibelius.xs4all.nl> <20060516204503.GC13210@nevyn.them.org> <200605162137.k4GLbZiS014187@elgar.sibelius.xs4all.nl> <20060516221837.GA15617@nevyn.them.org> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Tue, 16 May 2006 23:53:00 -0000 Message-Id: <1147815745.3672.163.camel@dufur.beaverton.ibm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.2.2 (2.2.2-5) Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IsSubscribed: yes 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: 2006-05/txt/msg00369.txt.bz2 On Tue, 2006-05-16 at 18:18 -0400, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote: > On Tue, May 16, 2006 at 11:37:35PM +0200, Mark Kettenis wrote: . . . > > And this is exactly the case where I think the jagged end of the > > backtrace is important. It indicates that GDB lost track somewhere > > and that the backtrace can't be trusted. > > I find that the backtrace stopping at a random function is clear > enough, personally. > The stack, up to where it hit the jagged edge, *can* be trusted. The trick is to let the user know that there might be more to the stack, but what GDB has shown so far is valid.