From: Mark Kettenis <mark.kettenis@xs4all.nl>
To: drow@false.org
Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com, ezannoni@redhat.com,
cagney@gnu.org, roland@redhat.com
Subject: Re: [rfa] Attach vsyscall support for GNU/Linux
Date: Sun, 07 Nov 2004 17:36:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <200411071735.iA7HZimk032505@elgar.sibelius.xs4all.nl> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20041105234229.GA6082@nevyn.them.org> (message from Daniel Jacobowitz on Fri, 5 Nov 2004 18:42:30 -0500)
Date: Fri, 5 Nov 2004 18:42:30 -0500
From: Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@false.org>
How about this, in the meantime? If you don't like the approach, I'll
wait until we can properly decide the relationship between unwinders
and frame types.
This patch adds a new sniffer, dwarf2_signal_frame_sniffer, which will
only accept the frame if an architecture-specific hook has claimed that
this is a signal frame (i386 GNU/Linux provides one that works by
name). However, we then use the CFI normally - the only difference is
that the result has SIGTRAMP_FRAME as its type. It works beautifully!
Tested on i386-pc-linux-gnu, with vsyscall DSO.
Within the current framework this seems to be a reasonable approach.
Actually it's a lot less invasive than I envisioned this to be. So,
actually I like it ;-). Thanks! I'm wondering though whether we need
the seperate dwarf2_signal_frame_sniffer. Actually I'm sure we don't.
Targets that don't want this simply shouldn't provide the
signal_frame_p() function. Can you fix that? Just change
dwarf2_frame_sniffer such that it checks signal_frame_p() and returns
&dwarf2_sigtramp_frame_unwind instead of &dwarf2_frame_unwind if it's
true.
Oh, and please check the dwarf2-frame.* changes in as a seperately
from the vsyscall changes.
Cheers,
Mark
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-11-07 17:36 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2004-10-24 18:53 Daniel Jacobowitz
2004-10-24 20:55 ` Mark Kettenis
2004-10-24 23:16 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2004-10-25 22:12 ` Mark Kettenis
2004-10-25 22:46 ` Andrew Cagney
2004-11-01 22:13 ` Mark Kettenis
2004-11-02 14:28 ` Andrew Cagney
2004-11-01 16:15 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2004-11-01 20:45 ` Mark Kettenis
2004-11-01 22:32 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2004-11-02 14:29 ` Andrew Cagney
2004-11-07 21:35 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2004-11-08 16:40 ` Andrew Cagney
2004-11-05 23:42 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2004-11-07 17:36 ` Mark Kettenis [this message]
2004-11-07 21:18 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2004-11-07 21:34 ` Mark Kettenis
2004-10-25 22:54 ` Andrew Cagney
2004-10-26 2:51 ` Roland McGrath
2004-10-26 8:17 ` Jakub Jelinek
2004-10-26 13:27 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
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=200411071735.iA7HZimk032505@elgar.sibelius.xs4all.nl \
--to=mark.kettenis@xs4all.nl \
--cc=cagney@gnu.org \
--cc=drow@false.org \
--cc=ezannoni@redhat.com \
--cc=gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com \
--cc=roland@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