From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 27030 invoked by alias); 12 May 2006 12:46:40 -0000 Received: (qmail 27022 invoked by uid 22791); 12 May 2006 12:46:40 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from nevyn.them.org (HELO nevyn.them.org) (66.93.172.17) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31.1) with ESMTP; Fri, 12 May 2006 12:46:37 +0000 Received: from drow by nevyn.them.org with local (Exim 4.54) id 1FeX2R-00010x-Bd for gdb-patches@sourceware.org; Fri, 12 May 2006 08:46:35 -0400 Date: Fri, 12 May 2006 12:46:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [RFC] Move the frame zero PC check earlier Message-ID: <20060512124635.GA3860@nevyn.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: gdb-patches@sourceware.org References: <20060510180312.GA12606@nevyn.them.org> <20060511223208.GA19492@nevyn.them.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.8i X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2006-05/txt/msg00235.txt.bz2 On Thu, May 11, 2006 at 11:20:03PM -0700, Jim Blandy wrote: > I think so. Using the backtrace above as an example, I understood why > we need to know frame #1's type, but I didn't see the point in > checking frame #2's type. > > But I think I do now. If CALL_DUMMY_LOCATION is AT_ENTRY_POINT, and > the entry point is at address zero, then the test as written above > would truncate backtraces at dummy frames. Yeah, that's the only case I could think of. It's a shame to do extra work for it everywhere - but probably safer. I can reorder the test to only check the frame type if the PC is zero, though. -- Daniel Jacobowitz CodeSourcery