From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 8651 invoked by alias); 1 Nov 2003 00:46:44 -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 8644 invoked from network); 1 Nov 2003 00:46:44 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO localhost.redhat.com) (207.219.125.105) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 1 Nov 2003 00:46:44 -0000 Received: from redhat.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0A9322B89; Fri, 31 Oct 2003 19:46:42 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <3FA30271.5020908@redhat.com> Date: Sat, 01 Nov 2003 00:46:00 -0000 From: Andrew Cagney User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; NetBSD macppc; en-US; rv:1.0.2) Gecko/20030820 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Kevin Buettner Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [rfa:symtab] deprecate inside_entry_func References: <3FA2F940.5040102@redhat.com> <1031101003654.ZM5020@localhost.localdomain> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2003-11/txt/msg00005.txt.bz2 > On Oct 31, 7:07pm, Andrew Cagney wrote: > > >> This patch deprecates the function inside_entry_func. Per the new comments: >> >> + /* NOTE: cagney/2003-10-31: A very simple test, such as >> + get_frame_func == entry_point should be sufficient for >> + identifying a pc in the entry function. Does anyone know why it >> + wasn't sufficient and hence, why the very convoluted >> + "deprecated_inside_entry_func" is needed. */ >> + /* NOTE: cagney/2003-10-31: An ABI and its crt0 code should define >> + and implement a clean frame termination. Not doing that is >> + really a bug in the ABI/crt0, and, hence, not a reason for >> + enabling the call to deprecated_inside_entry_func. */ > > > I do agree that it'd be nice if all ABIs provided a clean way to detect > the bottom-most frame. Not all of them do however, and in such cases, > a mechanism like inside_entry_func() is necessary. > So, in short, I oppose the deprecation of this function. Kevin, you previously wrote: >> I'd like to avoid re-introducing a dependency on inside_entry_func() as >> that places garish requirements on the object file readers :-( > > I agree that object file readers should not attempt to track of > the bounds of the start function. However, given an arbitrary > address, it's not unreasonable to ask the symtab machinery to attempt > to figure out the function bounds. And, in fact, this is just what > find_pc_partial_function() does. Andrew