Mirror of the gdb-patches mailing list
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Andrew Cagney <ac131313@redhat.com>
To: Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@mvista.com>
Cc: Mark Kettenis <kettenis@chello.nl>, gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH/i386newframe/RFC] DWARF CFI frame unwinder
Date: Mon, 05 May 2003 14:08:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <3EB67056.4070209@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20030505034242.GA21263@nevyn.them.org>


>> 
>> This isn't right.  It should return DW_AT_frame_base.  However, since 
>> dwarf2expr.c doesn't yet use these methods it doesn't [?] really matter. 
>>  Only affects ``info frame''.


> I don't think it should.

Er ...

> The frame's CFA is the basis for identifying the frame and locating
> saved registers in the CFI.  It is always present when you have CFI.
> 
> DW_AT_frame_base is the basis for locating saved variables and locals. 
> It is generally present when you have DWARF-2 debug info.

You and I went through all this not too long ago.  frame-base is for 
this high level thingie, frame-unwind is for the low level register 
information.

> The two are not necessarily related.  I don't remember how we settled
> on providing DW_AT_frame_base.  Possibly a debug info auxiliary to the
> function symbol or to the block.
> 
> 
> By the way, I don't remember something else I believe we've
> discussed...  Does each target that wants to use the CFI unwinder have
> to add it in its gdbarch initialization?

At present yes.

Given the amount of upheval required before a target will work with this 
code, it doesn't really matter.  As I,and now Mark, discovered, it is 
something of an all or nothing afair.

Andrew



  reply	other threads:[~2003-05-05 14:08 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2003-05-04 22:07 Mark Kettenis
2003-05-05  3:35 ` Andrew Cagney
2003-05-05  3:42   ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2003-05-05 14:08     ` Andrew Cagney [this message]
2003-05-05 14:27       ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2003-05-05 14:52         ` Andrew Cagney
2003-05-05 14:59           ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2003-05-05 14:11     ` Mark Kettenis
2003-05-05 13:48   ` Mark Kettenis
2003-05-05 14:24     ` Andrew Cagney
2003-05-05 13:52   ` Mark Kettenis
2003-05-05 14:31     ` Andrew Cagney

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=3EB67056.4070209@redhat.com \
    --to=ac131313@redhat.com \
    --cc=drow@mvista.com \
    --cc=gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com \
    --cc=kettenis@chello.nl \
    /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