From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 11124 invoked by alias); 5 Mar 2004 05:11:31 -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 11117 invoked from network); 5 Mar 2004 05:11:29 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO localhost.redhat.com) (24.157.170.238) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 5 Mar 2004 05:11:29 -0000 Received: from gnu.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 855A32B92; Fri, 5 Mar 2004 00:11:24 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <40480BFC.10801@gnu.org> Date: Fri, 05 Mar 2004 05:11:00 -0000 From: Andrew Cagney User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; NetBSD macppc; en-GB; rv:1.4.1) Gecko/20040217 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Mark Kettenis Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix SPARC backtraces References: <200403041010.i24AAqc2003176@elgar.kettenis.dyndns.org> In-Reply-To: <200403041010.i24AAqc2003176@elgar.kettenis.dyndns.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2004-03.o/txt/msg00094.txt Message-ID: <20040305051100.U_fjz1tF6RzNIYNxjESnh3qICG_OZPIir6ZYk-hVSos@z> > As discussed before on the list, this makes sure we do the full frame > analysis even if %fp is zero. This makes us do proper backtraces if a > frameless function was called from the outermost frame. Should this go on the branch? It appears to make things more robust. Andrew