From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 27153 invoked by alias); 11 Mar 2004 20:51:50 -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 27146 invoked from network); 11 Mar 2004 20:51:49 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO localhost.redhat.com) (216.129.200.20) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 11 Mar 2004 20:51:49 -0000 Received: from gnu.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0B2DD2B92; Thu, 11 Mar 2004 15:51:12 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <4050D13F.1040306@gnu.org> Date: Fri, 19 Mar 2004 00:09:00 -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: Daniel Jacobowitz Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [rfa/mips] Stop backtraces when we've lost the PC References: <20040306231743.GA9379@nevyn.them.org> <404BC4B2.7000100@gnu.org> <20040308032324.GA1325@nevyn.them.org> <20040308154814.GA17012@nevyn.them.org> In-Reply-To: <20040308154814.GA17012@nevyn.them.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2004-03/txt/msg00274.txt.bz2 Message-ID: <20040319000900.FLXYj-eDqRoeDWprowEXz3EvJiCEqfmxUhXe0-rAi0U@z> > I hypothesize that if two consecutive frames, regardless of their type, > claim to save the PC register at the same location, then unwinding is > hosed. It would need to do a deep analysis of the location (think about a register window architecture), hence I don't know that there's that much cost benefit. Something simpler such as a list of functions known to terminate the stack might be more useful. Andrew