From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 21651 invoked by alias); 21 May 2006 02:04:52 -0000 Received: (qmail 21635 invoked by uid 22791); 21 May 2006 02:04:50 -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; Sun, 21 May 2006 02:04:47 +0000 Received: from drow by nevyn.them.org with local (Exim 4.54) id 1FhdJ4-0002Ti-QC; Sat, 20 May 2006 22:04:34 -0400 Date: Sun, 21 May 2006 02:12:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: Mark Kettenis Cc: jimb@codesourcery.com, pgilliam@us.ibm.com, andrew.stubbs@st.com, brobecker@adacore.com, gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [RFC] Move the frame zero PC check earlier Message-ID: <20060521020434.GA9432@nevyn.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: Mark Kettenis , jimb@codesourcery.com, pgilliam@us.ibm.com, andrew.stubbs@st.com, brobecker@adacore.com, gdb-patches@sourceware.org References: <1147815745.3672.163.camel@dufur.beaverton.ibm.com> <20060517155729.GF27234@adacore.com> <446C3EB3.1040606@st.com> <1147969938.3672.168.camel@dufur.beaverton.ibm.com> <200605182004.k4IK49Eh003764@elgar.sibelius.xs4all.nl> <200605202129.k4KLT4g4014877@elgar.sibelius.xs4all.nl> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200605202129.k4KLT4g4014877@elgar.sibelius.xs4all.nl> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.11+cvs20060403 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/msg00436.txt.bz2 On Sat, May 20, 2006 at 11:29:04PM +0200, Mark Kettenis wrote: > I actually think that something like that is the way to go. It's > closely related to what Dan wrote about in: > > http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb/2006-05/msg00109.html > > and I'd like to have a go at implementing option #2 in that mail. That (the frame unwinder end-of-stack method) wouldn't actually help with this problem; that's why I sent the two separately (they were originally the same message when I was writing it). The architecture unwinder could report a saved pc of zero as terminating the stack, but in all the cases I'm interested in, the DWARF-2 unwinder is actually used for the bottom frame. > Unfortunately I'm leaving for a a four-week trip tomorrow. I won't be > able to read my mail for most of the time between now and june 17. Well, enjoy your trip. I have a thousand different things that need merging, and I'll be working on them over the coming weeks; but it won't do me any harm to table this one until we have time to discuss it further, as long as we've deliberately postponed it rather than let it fall through :-) So, I shall not pursue this patch right now, and we'll discuss it later (probably not until July; the GCC Summit at the end of June is going to wreck my schedule around when you get back). Thanks for all the comments! -- Daniel Jacobowitz CodeSourcery