Re: [PATCH] S/390 DWARF-2 CFI frame support

Daniel Jacobowitz
2003-12-05T02:13:34Z

On Fri, Dec 05, 2003 at 03:03:52AM +0100, Ulrich Weigand wrote:
> However, there is one point that requires special consideration
> in any case: what if the stack pointer is unspecified? On s390,
> treating it as preserved from the inner frame is correct, but
> on i386 and other platforms I guess this would be wrong -- it
> needs to be set to the CFA there (which is wrong on s390 due
> to the CFA bias we have).
>
> I'm not familiar enough with gdb internals to decide what the
> cleanest way of signaling that difference would be -- but there
> needs to be *some* way or s390 will not work. (My reggroup
> suggestion would provide a way to solve this problem as well.)

Just for my information...

Do you mean that the stack pointer always either:
- is preserved, i.e. UNMODIFIED
- or has explicit unwind information?

If so then yes, we definitely need to change something. I'm also in
favor of killing the warning, as I said at the time - having used a GDB
with it in place for some time now, I find it quite annoying.

--
Daniel Jacobowitz
MontaVista Software Debian GNU/Linux Developer