From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 26407 invoked by alias); 14 Oct 2003 12:57:35 -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 26393 invoked from network); 14 Oct 2003 12:57:33 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO nevyn.them.org) (66.93.172.17) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 14 Oct 2003 12:57:33 -0000 Received: from drow by nevyn.them.org with local (Exim 4.24 #1 (Debian)) id 1A9Ok0-0003iK-6m for ; Tue, 14 Oct 2003 08:57:32 -0400 Date: Tue, 14 Oct 2003 12:57:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: problem unwinding past pthread_cond_wait() on x86 RedHat 9.0 Message-ID: <20031014125731.GA14097@nevyn.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com References: <20031014054225.GB919@gnat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20031014054225.GB919@gnat.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.1i X-SW-Source: 2003-10/txt/msg00444.txt.bz2 On Mon, Oct 13, 2003 at 10:42:25PM -0700, Joel Brobecker wrote: > We now basically get almost nothing: > > #0 0xffffe002 in ?? () > #1 0x4002d379 in pthread_cond_wait@@GLIBC_2.3.2 () > from /lib/tls/libpthread.so.0 That's NPTL. Are you sure you understand the problem right - I don't have RH9's glibc here, only Rawhide's, but there's CFI for pthread_cond_wait in Rawhide. So anyway this _will_ go away someday. > The problem I am now trying to solve is the following: How can we fix > the i386 unwinder to be smart enough to handle this wicked function? > Is this even possible? The only possibility I see right now is with > dwarf2 CFI, but then the problem I foresee is that we can not help > the people using the stock RH9. If the only hope is with CFI, then > they will have to update their pthread library... You really can't unwind past this sort of thing without either debug info or frame pointers. How did it work in 5.3? I'm assuming dumb luck, we unwound 0xfffffe02 wrong. -- Daniel Jacobowitz MontaVista Software Debian GNU/Linux Developer