From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 16760 invoked by alias); 5 Apr 2003 13:57:11 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 16715 invoked from network); 5 Apr 2003 13:57:04 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO localhost.redhat.com) (24.157.166.107) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 5 Apr 2003 13:57:04 -0000 Received: from redhat.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A00BD2B23 for ; Sat, 5 Apr 2003 08:56:54 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <3E8EE0A6.4070403@redhat.com> Date: Sat, 05 Apr 2003 13:57:00 -0000 From: Andrew Cagney 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: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [RFA] Remove calls to inside_entry_file References: <3E84E8B4.7000502@redhat.com> <20030401153125.GY18138@cygbert.vinschen.de> <3E89B2AA.5060304@redhat.com> <20030401161824.GA18138@cygbert.vinschen.de> <3E89BFE4.7020500@redhat.com> <20030401170307.GD18138@cygbert.vinschen.de> <3E89CCC9.7040908@redhat.com> <20030401195832.GA10202@nevyn.them.org> <20030402092741.GA26480@cygbert.vinschen.de> <3E8B1178.6050605@redhat.com> <20030403131734.GN18138@cygbert.vinschen.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2003-04/txt/msg00079.txt.bz2 >> might be the best option. What about moving this: >> > >> > + >> > + /* If the architecture has a custom FRAME_CHAIN_VALID, call it > >> now. */ > >> > + if (FRAME_CHAIN_VALID_P ()) >> > + return FRAME_CHAIN_VALID (fp, fi); > >> >> to before this: >> >> + /* If we're already inside the entry function for the main objfile, >> then it >> + isn't valid. */ >> + if (inside_entry_func (get_frame_pc (fi))) >> + return 0; >> + >> + /* If we're inside the entry file, it isn't valid. */ >> + /* NOTE/drow 2002-12-25: should there be a way to disable this check? It >> + assumes a single small entry file, and the way some debug readers >> (e.g. >> + dbxread) figure out which object is the entry file is somewhat >> hokey. */ >> + if (inside_entry_file (frame_pc_unwind (fi))) >> + return 0; >> + >> + /* If we want backtraces to stop at main, and we're inside main, then it >> + isn't valid. */ >> + if (!backtrace_below_main && inside_main_func (get_frame_pc (fi))) >> + return 0; >> >> That more closely resembles the original behavior. > > > I think that's pretty much ok. Old targets in need of one of these functions > can still call it from (deprecated_)frame_chain_valid(). Ok, sold. Consider that approved. Andrew