From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gdb-patches-return-23113-listarch-gdb-patches=sources.redhat.com@sources.redhat.com>
Received: (qmail 20547 invoked by alias); 6 Mar 2003 20:13:22 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gdb-patches-subscribe@sources.redhat.com>
List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/gdb-patches/>
List-Post: <mailto:gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com>
List-Help: <mailto:gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sources.redhat.com
Received: (qmail 20540 invoked from network); 6 Mar 2003 20:13:22 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO localhost.redhat.com) (172.16.49.200)
  by 172.16.49.205 with SMTP; 6 Mar 2003 20:13:22 -0000
Received: from redhat.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by localhost.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 1F1F72A9C; Thu,  6 Mar 2003 15:13:18 -0500 (EST)
Message-ID: <3E67ABDD.4090401@redhat.com>
Date: Thu, 06 Mar 2003 20:13:00 -0000
From: Andrew Cagney <ac131313@redhat.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; NetBSD macppc; en-US; rv:1.0.2) Gecko/20030223
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Michal Ludvig <mludvig@suse.cz>
Cc: GDB Patches <gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [patch/rfc] Add a sentinel frame
References: <3E305670.3020700@redhat.com> <3E48378E.6090007@suse.cz> <3E492953.8010001@redhat.com> <3E52173B.1030800@suse.cz> <3E538770.6070209@redhat.com> <3E5B98D8.3030002@suse.cz> <3E5BAB7D.8090801@redhat.com> <3E5BD957.9010605@suse.cz> <3E5BDCBD.2030205@redhat.com> <3E5C7512.2080207@suse.cz> <3E5E58FC.3080704@redhat.com> <3E5F5DEE.3030505@suse.cz> <3E5F8559.1020708@redhat.com> <3E663605.6030105@suse.cz> <3E664100.4010009@redhat.com> <3E677087.70000@suse.cz>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-SW-Source: 2003-03/txt/msg00141.txt.bz2

> +static void
> +x86_64_save_dummy_frame_tos (CORE_ADDR sp)
> +{
> +  /* We must add the size of the return address that is already
> +     put on the stack.  */
> +  generic_save_dummy_frame_tos (sp + sizeof(CORE_ADDR));

Yes, but use TYPE_LENGTH (builtin_type_void_{code/data}_ptr).

> +}
> +
> +struct frame_id
> +x86_64_unwind_dummy_id (struct gdbarch *gdbarch, struct frame_info *frame)
> +{
> +  struct frame_id id;
> +
> +  id.pc = frame_pc_unwind (frame);
> +  frame_unwind_unsigned_register (frame, SP_REGNUM, &id.base);

Andrew

> +  return id;
> +}
> +