From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 18647 invoked by alias); 17 Apr 2008 15:29:03 -0000 Received: (qmail 18639 invoked by uid 22791); 17 Apr 2008 15:29:02 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from NaN.false.org (HELO nan.false.org) (208.75.86.248) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Thu, 17 Apr 2008 15:28:30 +0000 Received: from nan.false.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by nan.false.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A41CC983D6 for ; Thu, 17 Apr 2008 15:28:28 +0000 (GMT) Received: from caradoc.them.org (22.svnf5.xdsl.nauticom.net [209.195.183.55]) by nan.false.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 85D11982C4 for ; Thu, 17 Apr 2008 15:28:28 +0000 (GMT) Received: from drow by caradoc.them.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1JmW2E-0005TJ-Cl for gdb-patches@sourceware.org; Thu, 17 Apr 2008 11:28:26 -0400 Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2008 15:30:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [RFC 2/5] Frame unwinding using struct value Message-ID: <20080417152826.GA17488@caradoc.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: gdb-patches@sourceware.org References: <20080331221024.GA22334@caradoc.them.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2007-12-11) 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: 2008-04/txt/msg00337.txt.bz2 As usual, thank you for the comments. On Tue, Apr 01, 2008 at 06:27:58AM +0300, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > Thanks, this part is approved, but I have some comments: > > > +@node Stack Frames > > +@chapter Stack Frames > > + > > +@cindex frame > > +@cindex call stack frame > > +A frame is a construct that @value{GDBN} uses to keep track of calling > > +and called functions. > > + > > +@cindex frame, unwind > > It is not useful to have several index entries that begin with the > same string and point to the same page. So I suggest to replace the > last one with "@cindex unwind frame". Sure; I was just moving these, but let's take the opportunity to improve it further. > > +Developers wishing to learn more about unwinders, are encouraged to > > +read the @sc{dwarf} specification. > > How about a pointer to the DWARF Spec here? Sounds good. I expect it will stay on dwarfstd.org for a while; it's had several homes in the last few years. > > +is a sentinel frame, then @code{get_frame_type (@var{f}) == > > +SENTINEL_FRAME}. > > I would use @equiv{} here, of even @expansion{}, instead of a literal > "==". Interesting, I didn't know about those. I like the block of C code -- if you want to check whether something is a sentinel frame in GDB, you type get_frame_type (f) == SENTINEL_FRAME -- but @equiv will do nicely too so I'll use that. > > +@section Selecting an Unwinder > > Is it a good idea to have a section without a node? That's how most of the gdbint manual is currently arranged - one node per chapter, except for a few more substantial ones. I can move the new sections into nodes if you think that's better. > Please add an @findex entry for each function you mention. Done. > I think we should say "lvalue" here, not "lval". Fixed. > > +Same as @code{frame_unwind_got_constant}, excep that the value is a target > ^^^^^ > A typo. Also fixed. I'll repost the final patch in a little while. -- Daniel Jacobowitz CodeSourcery