From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 4011 invoked by alias); 31 Oct 2003 22:49:16 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 4002 invoked from network); 31 Oct 2003 22:49:15 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO palrel11.hp.com) (156.153.255.246) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 31 Oct 2003 22:49:15 -0000 Received: from hplms2.hpl.hp.com (hplms2.hpl.hp.com [15.0.152.33]) by palrel11.hp.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6F7871C01507; Fri, 31 Oct 2003 14:49:14 -0800 (PST) Received: from napali.hpl.hp.com (napali.hpl.hp.com [15.4.89.123]) by hplms2.hpl.hp.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/HPL-PA Hub) with ESMTP id h9VMnDRU002413; Fri, 31 Oct 2003 14:49:13 -0800 (PST) Received: from napali.hpl.hp.com (napali [127.0.0.1]) by napali.hpl.hp.com (8.12.3/8.12.3/Debian-6.6) with ESMTP id h9VMnDFO010504; Fri, 31 Oct 2003 14:49:13 -0800 Received: (from davidm@localhost) by napali.hpl.hp.com (8.12.3/8.12.3/Debian-6.6) id h9VMnDnN010500; Fri, 31 Oct 2003 14:49:13 -0800 From: David Mosberger MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <16290.59113.107019.946630@napali.hpl.hp.com> Date: Fri, 31 Oct 2003 22:49:00 -0000 To: Daniel Jacobowitz Cc: "J. Johnston" , gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com, Andrew Cagney , kevinb@redhat.com, davidm@hpl.hp.com Subject: Re: getunwind syscall In-Reply-To: <20031031200126.GA6723@nevyn.them.org> References: <3FA2B7CA.5070200@redhat.com> <20031031200126.GA6723@nevyn.them.org> Reply-To: davidm@hpl.hp.com X-URL: http://www.hpl.hp.com/personal/David_Mosberger/ X-SW-Source: 2003-10/txt/msg00895.txt.bz2 >>>>> On Fri, 31 Oct 2003 15:01:26 -0500, Daniel Jacobowitz said: Daniel> On Fri, Oct 31, 2003 at 02:28:10PM -0500, J. Johnston wrote: >> More info from David. Daniel> So the getunwind syscall returns data from the gate DSO? Almost. It returns the equivalent data as contained in the unwind tables of the gate DSO. The data itself isn't quite identical, but it serves the same purpose, yese. Daniel> I was under the impression it was some register backing Daniel> store, or similar. Nope. Daniel> In that case Roland's patches for the same issue on x86 Daniel> should be persued instead of using the syscall. Longer-term, certainly. But in the medium term (I'd say for the next 1-2 years at least), we need the syscall support for the many (older) kernels that are out there already. Only 2.6-based kernels will have the DSO. --david