Mirror of the gdb-patches mailing list
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Joel Brobecker <brobecker@adacore.com>
To: Andrew Cagney <cagney@gnu.org>
Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
Subject: Re: [RFC] Infinite backtraces...
Date: Thu, 02 Dec 2004 23:13:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20041202231255.GM994@adacore.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20041202224606.GL994@adacore.com>

> I am not sure I have a sufficiently high-level view of the entire
> code that is involved in unwinding, but it seemed to me that we need
> to add a new architecture-dependent hook that would tell whether a
> given frame is the initial one, and that unwinding can not be done
> past this frame. This naturally pointed to a new gdbarch method.
> 
> Something like gdbarch_upper_most_frame_p (....), with a default
> value that would always return false.

Something I forgot to add was that I thought about adding a frame
method (in the frame_unwind struct). But I don't this this is the
best approach, as you can have several unwinders active at the same
time for the same target, while the end-of-callstack condition
would remain the same reguardless of the type of unwinding we're
doing.

I am sort of walking on thin ice here, though. I could very well
imagine a case where we would rely on register value in one case,
and a flag from whatever frame information we find in another case.
This is why I'm mentioning this idea here. JIC.

-- 
Joel


  reply	other threads:[~2004-12-02 23:13 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 27+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2004-12-02 22:46 Joel Brobecker
2004-12-02 23:13 ` Joel Brobecker [this message]
2004-12-03  2:43   ` Randolph Chung
2004-12-03  2:57     ` Joel Brobecker
2004-12-03  4:53       ` Randolph Chung
2004-12-03 19:36         ` Joel Brobecker
2004-12-03 18:03           ` Randolph Chung
2004-12-03 18:20             ` Joel Brobecker
2004-12-03 18:22               ` Randolph Chung
2004-12-06  7:25               ` Randolph Chung
2004-12-07 10:07                 ` Joel Brobecker
2004-12-07 16:31                   ` Randolph Chung
2004-12-07 16:37                     ` Joel Brobecker
2004-12-07 16:52                       ` Randolph Chung
2004-12-08  1:51                       ` Randolph Chung
2004-12-12 16:36                         ` [commit] Move zero PC check to frame.c; Was: " Andrew Cagney
2004-12-03 18:22           ` Joel Brobecker
2004-12-06  4:15           ` Randolph Chung
2004-12-07  9:40             ` Joel Brobecker
2004-12-03 18:28 ` Andrew Cagney
2004-12-03 18:49   ` Joel Brobecker
2004-12-03 19:26     ` Andrew Cagney
2004-12-03 20:19       ` Joel Brobecker
2004-12-03 21:44         ` Andrew Cagney
2004-12-03 22:16           ` Joel Brobecker
2004-12-03 22:23             ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2004-12-03 22:25               ` Joel Brobecker

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=20041202231255.GM994@adacore.com \
    --to=brobecker@adacore.com \
    --cc=cagney@gnu.org \
    --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