From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gdb-patches-return-45392-listarch-gdb-patches=sources.redhat.com@sourceware.org>
Received: (qmail 11199 invoked by alias); 22 Aug 2006 21:24:32 -0000
Received: (qmail 11191 invoked by uid 22791); 22 Aug 2006 21:24:31 -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; Tue, 22 Aug 2006 21:24:30 +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 k7MLNuld002285; 	Tue, 22 Aug 2006 23:23:56 +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 k7MLNt1m002137; 	Tue, 22 Aug 2006 23:23:55 +0200 (CEST)
Received: (from kettenis@localhost) 	by elgar.sibelius.xs4all.nl (8.13.6/8.13.6/Submit) id k7MLNtDv006888; 	Tue, 22 Aug 2006 23:23:55 +0200 (CEST)
Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2006 21:36:00 -0000
Message-Id: <200608222123.k7MLNtDv006888@elgar.sibelius.xs4all.nl>
From: Mark Kettenis <mark.kettenis@xs4all.nl>
To: drow@false.org
CC: gdb-patches@sourceware.org
In-reply-to: <20060820170508.GD20987@nevyn.them.org> (message from Daniel 	Jacobowitz on Sun, 20 Aug 2006 13:05:08 -0400)
Subject: Re: [rfc, frame] Always check for unsaved PC
References: <20060819161139.GC25238@nevyn.them.org> <200608201427.k7KERnD0001824@elgar.sibelius.xs4all.nl> <20060820170508.GD20987@nevyn.them.org>
Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gdb-patches-subscribe@sourceware.org>
List-Archive: <http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/>
List-Post: <mailto:gdb-patches@sourceware.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org
X-SW-Source: 2006-08/txt/msg00175.txt.bz2

> Date: Sun, 20 Aug 2006 13:05:08 -0400
> From: Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@false.org>
>
> > This doesn't fly for architectures where the return address is
> > computed though, like on sparc.
> 
> I see that gdb doesn't use dwarf2 unwind tables on sparc.  Does GCC
> generate them?  How does GCC deal with the extra +8?  It looks like
> it doesn't; it uses %o7 to handle unwinding and just looks at the
> location of the call site.

We use them on Linux, but I haven't enabled the DWARF CFI frame
unwinder on all SPARC platforms yet because the StackGhost
complication on OpenBSD/sparc and OpenBSD/sparc64.

The extra +8 is handled by sparc{32|64}_dwarf2_frame_init_reg().

Mark