Re: [rfc] Unwind the ARM CPSR

[Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@false.org>]

On Thu, Oct 11, 2007 at 10:51:37AM -0400, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
> So why shouldn't the argument be the CURRENT (i.e. THIS) frame
> instead?  Then we can call frame_register (CURRENT) instead of
> frame_unwind_register (NEXT) to get the same result, plus we'll
> have the option of calling frame_unwind_register (CURRENT) when
> we need it.
> 
> Of course this would be a pain to change all at once since there are
> so many unwinders.  I'd introduce a new method instead
> (unwind->prev_register_this?).  What do you think?  Is there some
> reason I didn't think of why it would be naughty to use the current
> frame instead of the next one?

By the way, if I'm going to be changing the prev_register interface,
the other thing I've thought of doing is making it return a struct
value instead of filling in a pile of value-like fields (register
number, address, lval, et cetera).  I am a little worried about how
this would affect watchpoints on local variables though.

-- 
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery