From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 3218 invoked by alias); 1 Nov 2003 02:02:17 -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 3193 invoked from network); 1 Nov 2003 02:02:12 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO localhost.redhat.com) (65.49.0.121) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 1 Nov 2003 02:02:12 -0000 Received: from gnu.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9CD322B89; Fri, 31 Oct 2003 21:02:04 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <3FA3141C.7040900@gnu.org> Date: Sat, 01 Nov 2003 02:02:00 -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: Daniel Jacobowitz Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [commit] Don't call deprecated_inside_entry_file from ...id_unwind() References: <3FA2F789.5000306@redhat.com> <20031101004443.GB11987@nevyn.them.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2003-11/txt/msg00008.txt.bz2 > Are you certain that none of those other architectures needed the hack > anyway? To sound like a scratched record, until there is hard evidence that this test is needed it should _not_ be enabled. So far the only evidence is that it is anything but needed: /* NOTE: vinschen/2003-04-01: Disabled. It turns out that the call to deprecated_inside_entry_file destroys a meaningful backtrace under some conditions. E. g. the backtrace tests in the asm-source testcase are broken for some targets. In this test the functions are all implemented as part of one file and the testcase is not necessarily linked with a start file (depending on the target). What happens is, that the first frame is printed normaly and following frames are treated as being inside the enttry file then. This way, only the #0 frame is printed in the backtrace output. */ Also, as I noted: > That innocent looking code as quitely spread to at least 4 other > architectures (there was no comment saying "hey you don't need this"). the mere presence of that code in those up-to-date targets was a great big foobar. > Also, snce GDB does support backtracing when main isn't even in the > equation, I don't think we should break that unless the check is > actually harmful. The only testcase that comes close to having a problem is asm-source and that breaks with the test present. You'll note that I've not touched legacy targets. Andrew