From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 18471 invoked by alias); 25 Oct 2004 22:54:07 -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 18464 invoked from network); 25 Oct 2004 22:54:06 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (66.187.233.31) by sourceware.org with SMTP; 25 Oct 2004 22:54:06 -0000 Received: from int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (int-mx1.corp.redhat.com [172.16.52.254]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id i9PMs1j6016273 for ; Mon, 25 Oct 2004 18:54:01 -0400 Received: from localhost.redhat.com (to-dhcp51.toronto.redhat.com [172.16.14.151]) by int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id i9PMrur06683; Mon, 25 Oct 2004 18:53:56 -0400 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by localhost.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DD1E11294B5; Mon, 25 Oct 2004 18:52:46 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <417D83BB.3070706@gnu.org> Date: Mon, 25 Oct 2004 22:54:00 -0000 From: Andrew Cagney User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.8 (X11/20041020) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Daniel Jacobowitz , Mark Kettenis Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com, ezannoni@redhat.com, Roland McGrath Subject: Re: [rfa] Attach vsyscall support for GNU/Linux References: <20041024185345.GB22700@nevyn.them.org> <200410242054.i9OKsjnl028328@elgar.sibelius.xs4all.nl> <20041024231636.GA21927@nevyn.them.org> In-Reply-To: <20041024231636.GA21927@nevyn.them.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2004-10/txt/msg00420.txt.bz2 >>But there's another reason why I'm against this patch. It changes the >>order of the unwinders for all the other i386 targets too. Please >>find a way to do this such that it affect Linux only. >> >>Sorry, I didn't realize this before... I'd not get too hung up on this one. The current frame-unwind code sniff heuristic came about because it ``worked for me''. We're going to have to eventually replace it with something more complicated and until then, what ever. Sniffing a signal frame definitly takes higher priority than sniffing a normal frame. > OK, if the rest of the patch reaches consensus I will try to figure out > how to do this. It will probably just require conditional action based > on the osabi enum. Not hard. Andrew