Patch resubmitted. See comments below. Andrew Cagney wrote: > >>> +#define STRINGIFY2(name) #name >>> +#define STRINGIFY(name) STRINGIFY2(name) >>> + >>> +static char *get_reg_name = STRINGIFY(UNW_OBJ(get_reg)); >>> +static char *get_fpreg_name = STRINGIFY(UNW_OBJ(get_fpreg)); >>> +static char *get_saveloc_name = STRINGIFY(UNW_OBJ(get_saveloc)); >>> +static char *step_name = STRINGIFY(UNW_OBJ(step)); >>> +static char *init_remote_name = STRINGIFY(UNW_OBJ(init_remote)); >>> +static char *create_addr_space_name = >>> STRINGIFY(UNW_OBJ(create_addr_space)); >>> +static char *search_unwind_table_name = >>> STRINGIFY(UNW_OBJ(search_unwind_table)); >>> +static char *find_dyn_list_name = STRINGIFY(UNW_OBJ(find_dyn_list)); >>> >>> I don't understand this. A guess is that UNW_OBJ() is doing >>> something evil (use "include/sym-cat.h") to those names and having >>> the array (use "static const char [] = ..." and local to >>> libunwind_load) makes ones debugging life much easier? If this is >>> the case, can you add some commentary? > > >> Yes. The libunwind code is slightly ugly with respect to the fact >> that the function names are not aliased with generic names. They all >> have platform prefixes so I must spell them out. Function names are >> generated automatically using the UNW_OBJ macro. > > > Can you please add this to the file as a comment. > Done. > > >> +void >> +libunwind_frame_set_descr (struct gdbarch *gdbarch, struct >> libunwind_descr *descr) >> +{ >> + struct libunwind_descr *arch_descr; >> + >> + gdb_assert (gdbarch != NULL); >> + >> + arch_descr = gdbarch_data (gdbarch, libunwind_descr_handle); >> + >> + if (arch_descr == NULL) >> + { >> + /* First time here. Must initialize data area. */ >> + arch_descr = libunwind_descr_init (gdbarch); >> + set_gdbarch_data (gdbarch, libunwind_descr_handle, arch_descr); >> + } >> + >> + /* Copy new descriptor info into arch descriptor. */ >> + arch_descr->gdb2uw = descr->gdb2uw; >> + arch_descr->uw2gdb = descr->uw2gdb; >> + arch_descr->is_fpreg = descr->is_fpreg; >> + arch_descr->accessors = descr->accessors; >> +} > > > Yes! Now the architecture has-a libunwind structure. > > Doesn't the configury make this: > >> +#ifdef HAVE_LIBUNWIND_H > > > redundant? > It is possible for the user to enable libunwind but the header files are not there. I am guessing you would prefer compilation to fail in this case so I have removed the check. >> + libunwind_descr_handle = register_gdbarch_data (libunwind_descr_init); >> + >> + libunwind_initialized = libunwind_load (); >> +#endif > > >> + Contributed by Jeff Johnston. > > > (redhat) > Changed. > >> +const struct frame_unwind *libunwind_frame_sniffer (struct frame_info >> *next_frame); > > > Comments for this one ... > Done. >> +void libunwind_frame_set_descr (struct gdbarch *arch, struct >> libunwind_descr *descr); >> + >> +void libunwind_frame_this_id (struct frame_info *next_frame, void >> **this_cache, >> + struct frame_id *this_id); >> +void libunwind_frame_prev_register (struct frame_info *next_frame, >> void **this_cache, >> + int regnum, int *optimizedp, >> + enum lval_type *lvalp, CORE_ADDR *addrp, >> + int *realnump, void *valuep); >> +CORE_ADDR libunwind_frame_base_address (struct frame_info >> *next_frame, void **this_cache); >> + >> +int libunwind_is_initialized (void); >> + >> +int libunwind_search_unwind_table (void *as, long ip, void *di, >> + void *pi, int need_unwind_info, void *args); > > > Also comments for this one ... > I have added comments for the search unwind table call. >> +unw_word_t libunwind_find_dyn_list (unw_addr_space_t, void *, size_t, >> + unw_word_t, unw_word_t, void *); > > >> Index: Makefile.in > > > Yep. > >> + libunwind-frame.c \ > > >> - $(elf_bfd_h) $(dis_asm_h) >> + $(elf_bfd_h) $(dis_asm_h) $(libunwind_frame_h) > > >> +libunwind-frame.o: libunwind-frame.c $(defs_h) \ >> + $(frame_h) $(frame_base_h) $(frame_unwind_h) $(gdbcore_h) \ >> + $(gdbtypes_h) $(symtab_h) $(objfiles_h) $(regcache_h) \ >> + $(gdb_assert_h) $(gdb_string_h) $(complaints_h) $(libunwind_frame_h) > > >> Index: configure.in >> =================================================================== >> RCS file: /cvs/src/src/gdb/configure.in,v >> retrieving revision 1.132 >> diff -u -r1.132 configure.in >> --- configure.in 3 Sep 2003 15:02:48 -0000 1.132 >> +++ configure.in 22 Oct 2003 23:36:21 -0000 >> @@ -192,6 +192,33 @@ >> enable_gdbtk=no ;; >> esac > > > Based on 12.1 Working With External Software > http://www.gnu.org/software/autoconf/manual/autoconf-2.57/html_chapter/autoconf_12.html#SEC130 > > > I suspect that this should be --with (external libunwind software), and > not --enable (gdb feature), although, to be honest, its hard to tell > which it should be. > > Anyone? > From discussions with Jeff Law when I was doing configuration for newlib, he told me that --enable should be used for on/off decisions in preference to --with. I don't personally care so I have switched to --with. >> +# Enable libunwind support. >> +AC_ARG_ENABLE(libunwind, >> +[ --enable-libunwind enable libunwind frame unwinding >> support], >> + [case $enableval in >> + yes | no) > > > The behavior should be: > > --{with,enable}-libunwind > Enable libunwind unconditionally. > > --{without,disable}-libunwind > Disable libunwind unconditionally > >> + ;; >> + *) >> + AC_MSG_ERROR([bad value $enableval for --enable-libunwind]) ;; >> + esac] > > > > Check for "libunwind.h" and "libunwind-ia64.h" and if present, enable > it. Something like: > AC_CHECK_HEADERS(libunwind.h) > AC_CHECK_HEADERS(libunwind-ia64.h) > test $ac_cv_have_libunwind_h = yes && enable_libunwind=yes > > ) > > And then just: > >> + if test x"$enable_libunwind" = xyes; then >> + AC_CHECK_HEADERS(libunwind.h) >> + AC_CHECK_HEADERS(libunwind-ia64.h) >> + CONFIG_OBS="$CONFIG_OBS libunwind-frame.o" >> + CONFIG_DEPS="$CONFIG_DEPS libunwind-frame.o" >> + CONFIG_SRCS="$CONFIG_SRCS libunwind-frame.c" > > > but also AC_DEFINE(HAVE_LIBUNWIND) so that it can be used. > Done.