From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 5314 invoked by alias); 13 May 2006 16:49:15 -0000 Received: (qmail 5306 invoked by uid 22791); 13 May 2006 16:49:14 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from sibelius.xs4all.nl (HELO sibelius.xs4all.nl) (82.92.89.47) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Sat, 13 May 2006 16:49:12 +0000 Received: from elgar.sibelius.xs4all.nl (root@elgar.sibelius.xs4all.nl [192.168.0.2]) by sibelius.xs4all.nl (8.13.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k4DGmQu3016546; Sat, 13 May 2006 18:48:26 +0200 (CEST) Received: from elgar.sibelius.xs4all.nl (kettenis@localhost.sibelius.xs4all.nl [127.0.0.1]) by elgar.sibelius.xs4all.nl (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id k4DGmQNE020604; Sat, 13 May 2006 18:48:26 +0200 (CEST) Received: (from kettenis@localhost) by elgar.sibelius.xs4all.nl (8.13.6/8.13.6/Submit) id k4DGmQqO015649; Sat, 13 May 2006 18:48:26 +0200 (CEST) Date: Sat, 13 May 2006 17:08:00 -0000 Message-Id: <200605131648.k4DGmQqO015649@elgar.sibelius.xs4all.nl> From: Mark Kettenis To: drow@false.org CC: gdb-patches@sourceware.org In-reply-to: <20060513151748.GA4411@nevyn.them.org> (message from Daniel Jacobowitz on Sat, 13 May 2006 11:17:48 -0400) Subject: Re: [RFC] Move the frame zero PC check earlier References: <20060510180312.GA12606@nevyn.them.org> <200605130946.k4D9kZ2M001331@elgar.sibelius.xs4all.nl> <20060513151338.GB3721@nevyn.them.org> <20060513151748.GA4411@nevyn.them.org> 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/msg00300.txt.bz2 > Date: Sat, 13 May 2006 11:17:48 -0400 > From: Daniel Jacobowitz > > On Sat, May 13, 2006 at 11:13:38AM -0400, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote: > > I think that determining the end of stack cleanly is one of the more > > important things for GDB to get right. And when we've run out of > > useful information, the stack appears to end, and we're quite justified > > in reporting that the stack ended. It's quite complex enough already > > without reporting "but the end of the stack looks a little funny to > > me...". > > By the way, there's plenty of precedent for this in GDB, including some > you've written yourself. If the saved value of %ebp on the stack gets > clobbered, when the i386 prologue analyzer is involved, we'll > gracefully report that there are no more frames (cache->base == 0). > Why should this be different? Because once upon a time, when GCC still exclusively used %ebp as a frame pointer, %ebp == 0 was the standard way to mark the outermost frame. I should probably remove that check. Mark