From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 20257 invoked by alias); 24 Nov 2010 22:26:08 -0000 Received: (qmail 20249 invoked by uid 22791); 24 Nov 2010 22:26:07 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from rock.gnat.com (HELO rock.gnat.com) (205.232.38.15) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Wed, 24 Nov 2010 22:26:02 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by filtered-rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2E9C52BAC8F; Wed, 24 Nov 2010 17:26:01 -0500 (EST) Received: from rock.gnat.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (rock.gnat.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id PJcVHmld-ClB; Wed, 24 Nov 2010 17:26:01 -0500 (EST) Received: from joel.gnat.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F23AB2BAB2B; Wed, 24 Nov 2010 17:26:00 -0500 (EST) Received: by joel.gnat.com (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 0DECF1457E1; Wed, 24 Nov 2010 14:25:55 -0800 (PST) Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2010 22:26:00 -0000 From: Joel Brobecker To: Mark Kettenis Cc: pierre.muller@ics-cnrs.unistra.fr, gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [RFC] Improve amd64 prologue analysis Message-ID: <20101124222555.GG2634@adacore.com> References: <001701cb84ea$6883c170$398b4450$@muller@ics-cnrs.unistra.fr> <20101118172209.GE2634@adacore.com> <004201cb87c1$dab95cd0$902c1670$@muller@ics-cnrs.unistra.fr> <201011242118.oAOLIqZI030918@glazunov.sibelius.xs4all.nl> <20101124221451.GE2634@adacore.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20101124221451.GE2634@adacore.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) 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: 2010-11/txt/msg00419.txt.bz2 > > Now I suspect that 64-bit Windows, given its utterly retarded IL32P64 > > model, doesn't follow that ABI. Therefore my suggestion would be to > > only use this code on Windows. > > On windows, there is some unwinding info that's generated as well. > We just don't read it, yet. It's something we'd love to do at AdaCore > eventually, but we're lacking the time at the moment. One last bit of information - which I got second hand, but hopefully accurate. I think that the GCC team is on its way to generating the unwinding info in that format, rather than the usual DWARF-based eh_frame/debug_frame. So the Microsoft format should become the default even for code generated by GCC... So eventually, I think we are going to need to add an unwinder for that, even for GCC code. -- Joel