From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 24388 invoked by alias); 15 Jul 2008 22:41:37 -0000 Received: (qmail 24379 invoked by uid 22791); 15 Jul 2008 22:41:36 -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, 15 Jul 2008 22:41:19 +0000 Received: from brahms.sibelius.xs4all.nl (kettenis@localhost.sibelius.xs4all.nl [127.0.0.1]) by brahms.sibelius.xs4all.nl (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id m6FMfDFF019357; Wed, 16 Jul 2008 00:41:13 +0200 (CEST) Received: (from kettenis@localhost) by brahms.sibelius.xs4all.nl (8.14.3/8.14.3/Submit) id m6FMfCFC008363; Wed, 16 Jul 2008 00:41:12 +0200 (CEST) Date: Tue, 15 Jul 2008 22:41:00 -0000 Message-Id: <200807152241.m6FMfCFC008363@brahms.sibelius.xs4all.nl> From: Mark Kettenis To: drow@false.org CC: gdb-patches@sourceware.org In-reply-to: <20080715192213.GC3094@caradoc.them.org> (message from Daniel Jacobowitz on Tue, 15 Jul 2008 15:22:13 -0400) Subject: Re: [commit] Rename frame_pc_unwind and frame_unwind_id References: <20080715190125.GC32644@caradoc.them.org> <200807151908.m6FJ8YK3001326@brahms.sibelius.xs4all.nl> <20080715192213.GC3094@caradoc.them.org> 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: 2008-07/txt/msg00332.txt.bz2 > Date: Tue, 15 Jul 2008 15:22:13 -0400 > From: Daniel Jacobowitz > > On Tue, Jul 15, 2008 at 09:08:34PM +0200, Mark Kettenis wrote: > > > Date: Tue, 15 Jul 2008 15:01:25 -0400 > > > From: Daniel Jacobowitz > > > > > > This patch is the first non-trivial change in inlining support, and > > > readily separable. > > > > Non-trivial... > > > > > The users of frame_unwind_id and frame_pc_unwind are all either > > > inferior control, trying to find the caller / return address of a new > > > function, or trampoline handling. I audited all of the uses, and the > > > right behavior in every one of them is to ignore any inlined functions > > > at the current location. A future patch, the one adding inlined > > > frames, will make the corresponding change to frame_unwind_caller_id > > > and frame_unwind_caller_pc. For now, I've just renamed them to > > > indicate the correct expectations. > > > > ...so cann't we discuss this first please? > > Sorry. Want me to back it out? I'm not going to commit anything > further; I've just posted the meat of the patch, which is harder to > separate. If it's easy for you to back it out, I'd appreciate it. I really don't think the new names are an improvement, and they are longer makeing the code slightly less readable... > I'm interested in your comments (about this patch or the larger one). ...but my main concern is that this diff and the larger one change the meaning of a frame. It seems it gets us further away of what I consider to be frame. Please give me a day or so to study the diff a bit more, before I give a more detailed reaction. Sorry that I didn't look closely enough at your earlier mails about the inlining support. I thought they were mainly dealing with the debug info side of things and didn't really affect the unwinders.