Mirror of the gdb-patches mailing list
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Andrew Cagney <ac131313@redhat.com>
To: Mark Kettenis <kettenis@chello.nl>, mludvig@suse.cz
Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
Subject: Re: [offbyone RFC] Merge i386newframe
Date: Fri, 14 Mar 2003 16:19:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <3E720120.9060302@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <3E71F9B4.5000504@redhat.com>

>    If the previous frame's direction flag should have been reset then the    register unwind code should have done that (wonder if dwarf2cfi is    powerful enough to specify this).
> 
> I felt that it is somehow different from a "saved" registers.  But
> your phrasing makes me believe it's more correct to reset from the
> register unwind code.
> 
> I don't think it is any different.  For:
> 
>     (gdb) up
>     Frame #1 foo()
>     (gdb) info register psw
> 
> to work correctly, the register unwind code will need to zap that bit. Otherwize GDB will mis-represent the value of the PSW in the calling frame.
> 
> I think there is still going to be a problem in the CFI unwinder.  The CFI spec as the `architectural' register unwind rule as a loop-hole. Something related to that may need to be added.  Wonder if GCC even thought to generate it.  Hmm, the throw/catch code must have done something .... 

Thinking about this some more, a generic pop function won't work.

Consider the frames:

- sentinel
- normal
- sigtramp
- dummy

It's only when unwinding a normal frame that that PSW bit should be 
zapped.  For all the others the PSW value of the callee was hopefully 
completly saved by the caller.

Andrew



  reply	other threads:[~2003-03-14 16:19 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2003-03-12 22:06 Michal Ludvig
2003-03-12 22:42 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2003-03-13 19:05 ` Andrew Cagney
2003-03-13 22:46   ` Mark Kettenis
2003-03-14 15:48     ` Andrew Cagney
2003-03-14 16:19       ` Andrew Cagney [this message]
2003-03-14 18:20       ` Andrew Cagney
2003-04-06 17:10     ` Andrew Cagney
2003-04-07 18:53       ` Mark Kettenis
2003-03-14 11:54   ` Michal Ludvig
2003-03-14 15:59     ` Andrew Cagney
2003-03-14 15:43 ` Michal Ludvig
2003-03-16 12:48   ` Mark Kettenis
2003-03-17  7:52     ` Michal Ludvig

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=3E720120.9060302@redhat.com \
    --to=ac131313@redhat.com \
    --cc=gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com \
    --cc=kettenis@chello.nl \
    --cc=mludvig@suse.cz \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox