From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 5164 invoked by alias); 16 May 2007 15:23:47 -0000 Received: (qmail 5142 invoked by uid 22791); 16 May 2007 15:23:46 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from return.false.org (HELO return.false.org) (66.207.162.98) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Wed, 16 May 2007 15:23:34 +0000 Received: from return.false.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by return.false.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D71CB4B267; Wed, 16 May 2007 10:23:30 -0500 (CDT) Received: from caradoc.them.org (dsl093-172-095.pit1.dsl.speakeasy.net [66.93.172.95]) by return.false.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 838B14B262; Wed, 16 May 2007 10:23:26 -0500 (CDT) Received: from drow by caradoc.them.org with local (Exim 4.67) (envelope-from ) id 1HoLLZ-0001zT-Vo; Wed, 16 May 2007 11:23:25 -0400 Date: Wed, 16 May 2007 15:23:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: Luis Machado Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [patch] Backtrace prints wrong argument value Message-ID: <20070516152325.GA7637@caradoc.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: Luis Machado , gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com References: <1177527233.12599.42.camel@localhost> <20070425191304.GA1283@caradoc.them.org> <1179293640.4323.16.camel@localhost> <20070516144250.GD24682@caradoc.them.org> <1179328781.4295.13.camel@localhost> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1179328781.4295.13.camel@localhost> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.15 (2007-04-09) 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: 2007-05/txt/msg00281.txt.bz2 On Wed, May 16, 2007 at 12:19:41PM -0300, Luis Machado wrote: > If there is a way to temporarily store those values that we know for > sure that will be wasted during the next inner frame's function > execution, we could recover them during backtrace. That could add some > complexity to the unwinding procedure though. This is, generally speaking, impossible. I hadn't thought of the init_frame_regs hook last time I looked at this; I hope it helps. -- Daniel Jacobowitz CodeSourcery