Re: [RFA] Revise assertion in frame_saved_regs_register_unwind()

[Andrew Cagney <ac131313@ges.redhat.com>]

(I lost this one, thought you'd committed it).

> In the course of rewriting mips_get_saved_register(), I found that
> that an assertion in blockframe.c was erroneously failing.  See
> comment in patch for details.  Also, note that set_unwind_by_pc()
> sets the unwinder to frame_saved_regs_register_unwind() for the
> non-generic dummy frame case.
> 
> (This patch is a prerequisite for my upcoming mips_get_saved_register()
> rewrite.)
> 
> Okay to commit?
> 
> 	* blockframe.c (frame_saved_regs_register_unwind): Revise
> 	PC_IN_CALL_DUMMY_ASSERTION to only apply when generic dummy
> 	frames are in use.

Yes.  (Of course all targets should be using generic dummy frames but 
until then :-).

thanks
Andrew


> Index: blockframe.c
> ===================================================================
> RCS file: /cvs/src/src/gdb/blockframe.c,v
> retrieving revision 1.34
> diff -u -p -r1.34 blockframe.c
> --- blockframe.c	24 Jul 2002 14:38:55 -0000	1.34
> +++ blockframe.c	8 Aug 2002 20:54:14 -0000
> @@ -1410,7 +1410,11 @@ frame_saved_regs_register_unwind (struct
>    /* There is always a frame at this point.  And THIS is the frame
>       we're interested in.  */
>    gdb_assert (frame != NULL);
> -  gdb_assert (!PC_IN_CALL_DUMMY (frame->pc, frame->frame, frame->frame));
> +  /* If we're using generic dummy frames, we'd better not be in a call
> +     dummy.  (generic_call_dummy_register_unwind ought to have been called
> +     instead.)  */
> +  gdb_assert (!(USE_GENERIC_DUMMY_FRAMES
> +                && PC_IN_CALL_DUMMY (frame->pc, frame->frame, frame->frame)));
>  
>    /* Load the saved_regs register cache.  */
>    if (frame->saved_regs == NULL)
> 
>