From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 28253 invoked by alias); 31 Mar 2011 16:04:18 -0000 Received: (qmail 28235 invoked by uid 22791); 31 Mar 2011 16:04:16 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mail.codesourcery.com (HELO mail.codesourcery.com) (38.113.113.100) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Thu, 31 Mar 2011 16:04:13 +0000 Received: (qmail 24116 invoked from network); 31 Mar 2011 16:04:12 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO scottsdale.localnet) (pedro@127.0.0.2) by mail.codesourcery.com with ESMTPA; 31 Mar 2011 16:04:12 -0000 From: Pedro Alves To: "Ulrich Weigand" Subject: Re: [rfc] Fix broken i386 signal unwinding (Re: graceful unwind termination when we'd need unavailable/uncollect memory or registers to unwind further) Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2011 16:20:00 -0000 User-Agent: KMail/1.13.5 (Linux/2.6.35-28-generic; KDE/4.6.1; x86_64; ; ) Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org References: <201103311357.p2VDvp7s026986@d06av02.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com> In-Reply-To: <201103311357.p2VDvp7s026986@d06av02.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <201103311704.09593.pedro@codesourcery.com> 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: 2011-03/txt/msg01220.txt.bz2 On Thursday 31 March 2011 14:57:51, Ulrich Weigand wrote: > It seems this change broke unwinding out of signal trampoline > frames on i386 for me. In this case, neither SAVED_SP nor > SAVED_SP_REG is set; instead, SP is supposed to be unwound > from memory (the trampoline stack frame) via SAVED_REGS. > > However, after your change, we now fall into the _got_constant > case and SP is always unwound as 0. > > The following patch fixes this for me, and gets about 50 test > cases back to PASS. > > Does this look right to you? Yes it does. Thanks much for tracking and fixing it. -- Pedro Alves