From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 22045 invoked by alias); 3 Jan 2007 22:02:32 -0000 Received: (qmail 22028 invoked by uid 22791); 3 Jan 2007 22:02:32 -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; Wed, 03 Jan 2007 22:02:27 +0000 Received: from drow by nevyn.them.org with local (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1H2EBk-0006p0-1T; Wed, 03 Jan 2007 17:02:24 -0500 Date: Wed, 03 Jan 2007 22:02:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: Mark Kettenis Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [patch RFC] Re: Notes on a frame_unwind_address_in_block problem Message-ID: <20070103220223.GK17935@nevyn.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: Mark Kettenis , gdb-patches@sourceware.org References: <200607132020.k6DKKCSB023812@elgar.sibelius.xs4all.nl> <20060718183910.GB17864@nevyn.them.org> <20070101191927.GA14930@nevyn.them.org> <200701011954.l01Js85r031019@brahms.sibelius.xs4all.nl> <20070101200248.GA19073@nevyn.them.org> <200701031137.l03Bb0rT031898@brahms.sibelius.xs4all.nl> <20070103161257.GA14162@nevyn.them.org> <200701032027.l03KRv4h000275@brahms.sibelius.xs4all.nl> <20070103203007.GA23392@nevyn.them.org> <200701032158.l03LwPeq026191@brahms.sibelius.xs4all.nl> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200701032158.l03LwPeq026191@brahms.sibelius.xs4all.nl> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11) X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2007-01/txt/msg00083.txt.bz2 On Wed, Jan 03, 2007 at 10:58:25PM +0100, Mark Kettenis wrote: > Heh, well, if you do the mechanical frame_unwind_address_in_block() > changes I'll do frame_func_unwind(). > > After that we can actually worry about about fixing things. > > Deal? Absolutely. If you can hand me a patch which adds NORMAL_FRAME to every call to frame_func_unwind, I'll do all the rest. I'm pretty sure all of the existing call sites are NORMAL_FRAME; there won't be a SIGTRAMP_FRAME one until we split out two this_id functions for dwarf2. I've got frame_unwind_address_in_block done locally. -- Daniel Jacobowitz CodeSourcery