From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 9584 invoked by alias); 25 Apr 2008 02:06:03 -0000 Received: (qmail 9569 invoked by uid 22791); 25 Apr 2008 02:06:01 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from viper.snap.net.nz (HELO viper.snap.net.nz) (202.37.101.25) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Fri, 25 Apr 2008 02:05:34 +0000 Received: from kahikatea.snap.net.nz (194.30.255.123.static.snap.net.nz [123.255.30.194]) by viper.snap.net.nz (Postfix) with ESMTP id DBBD53DB8B0; Fri, 25 Apr 2008 14:05:31 +1200 (NZST) Received: by kahikatea.snap.net.nz (Postfix, from userid 1000) id EE2D28FC6D; Fri, 25 Apr 2008 14:05:16 +1200 (NZST) From: Nick Roberts MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <18449.15452.182542.737916@kahikatea.snap.net.nz> Date: Fri, 25 Apr 2008 11:41:00 -0000 To: Daniel Jacobowitz Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] -stack-info-frame/-stack-list-frames In-Reply-To: <20080424230813.GA12341@caradoc.them.org> References: <200804230933.04964.vladimir@codesourcery.com> <18446.63716.779534.2827@kahikatea.snap.net.nz> <200804231349.35190.vladimir@codesourcery.com> <18447.12269.389044.431822@kahikatea.snap.net.nz> <20080423125410.GA19773@caradoc.them.org> <18447.46315.956290.915310@kahikatea.snap.net.nz> <20080423222414.GA23569@caradoc.them.org> <18447.50396.538278.140944@kahikatea.snap.net.nz> <20080424021509.GA3497@caradoc.them.org> <18449.4568.206733.6318@kahikatea.snap.net.nz> <20080424230813.GA12341@caradoc.them.org> X-Mailer: VM 7.19 under Emacs 22.2.50.2 X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2008-04/txt/msg00569.txt.bz2 Daniel Jacobowitz writes: > > Maybe Gdb could somehow identify the cases where the address isn't useful. > > If there are known cases where the address isn't useful, I (like > Vladimir) do not understand why we should export it. For the cases where it is useful? > > I don't think the number need be that unbounded, it's not needed for each > > frame, only those in which a varobj is created. But it appears that the > > linked list of frames gets destroyed and recreated each time execution > > occurs, in which case any id information is also lost (I was looking at > > using an extra member in struct frame_info). > > Right, that's the whole problem. It has to last as long as the > frame_id, not the frame_info. It looks pretty intractable. It looks like the only place to store the identifier is in the stack itself, perhap through some compile option, -fframe-id, say. I don't know if compilers are allowed to create local variables and I guess it's all getting too complicated. -- Nick http://www.inet.net.nz/~nickrob