From: "Peter.Schauer" <Peter.Schauer@regent.e-technik.tu-muenchen.de>
To: Richard.Earnshaw@arm.com
Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
Subject: Re: [RFD] How to fix FRAME_CHAIN_VALID redefinition in config/i386/tm-i386v4.h ?
Date: Mon, 18 Feb 2002 04:02:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <200202181202.NAA06278@reisser.regent.e-technik.tu-muenchen.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200202181051.KAA02319@cam-mail2.cambridge.arm.com>; from "Richard Earnshaw" at Feb 18, 102 11:54 am
> > I did have a look at Richard's code, but *gdbarch_init() depends on the
> > things passed in via `struct gdbarch_info'.
> >
> > gdbarch_tdep_info seemed promising, but is currently unused, so it seems
> > that in the current framework we have to deduce everything from a BFD.
> >
> > However, in my particular case, you can't tell a GNU/Linux core file
> > from a generic ELF core file (there are no .note.ABI-tag sections in a
> > core file).
> > Even if we add an `os' field to `struct gdbarch_info', we would have to pass
> > the os information down all the way from core_open -> set_gdbarch_from_file.
> > And even then we can't tell the current `os' for the core file in core_open.
> > It seems that we have to avoid any additional OS dependency for core files
> > in the gdbarch vector, although having gdbarch try the OS specific one before
> > the generic one might be feasible.
> >
> > The immediate problem would be fixed by requiring FRAME_CHAIN_VALID only at
> > multi-arch level 2.
> >
>
> A couple of observations, which may be off base.
>
> 1) If you are running with a core file, the functionality of gdb is going
> to be largely limited to examining data structures etc. I'm not aware
> that gdb can step or call inferior functions etc once we've dumped core.
> So it may be that a generic core description is adequate.
In my particular case, I was thinking about tinkering with frame_chain_valid,
which affected backtraces in core files.
> 2) Where are your symbols coming from. It surely isn't the core file, so
> it is probably the original image. If you have that somewhere then you
> can determine its OS and ABI and use that to aid interpreting the core
> file, right?
If we should ever need it (although we should try hard to avoid it), this
might be the right approach.
Passing a `core file' flag to *gdbarch_init, and leaving *gdbarch_init the
choice to not change the `os' if it is called from core_open.
--
Peter Schauer pes@regent.e-technik.tu-muenchen.de
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2002-02-18 12:02 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2002-02-17 5:45 Peter.Schauer
2002-02-17 8:23 ` Andrew Cagney
2002-02-17 8:37 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2002-02-17 8:57 ` Andrew Cagney
2002-02-17 8:58 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2002-02-18 0:44 ` Peter.Schauer
2002-02-18 2:52 ` Richard Earnshaw
2002-02-18 4:02 ` Peter.Schauer [this message]
2002-02-18 2:43 ` Richard Earnshaw
2002-02-17 9:23 ` Andrew Cagney
2002-02-18 0:33 ` Peter.Schauer
2002-02-18 6:58 ` Andrew Cagney
2002-02-18 7:57 ` Andrew Cagney
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=200202181202.NAA06278@reisser.regent.e-technik.tu-muenchen.de \
--to=peter.schauer@regent.e-technik.tu-muenchen.de \
--cc=Richard.Earnshaw@arm.com \
--cc=gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox