Re: [RFC] Move the frame zero PC check earlier

[Andrew STUBBS <andrew.stubbs@st.com>]

Did anything more happen to this since May?

This is a feature I would like to see.

Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
> On Sat, May 20, 2006 at 11:29:04PM +0200, Mark Kettenis wrote:
>> I actually think that something like that is the way to go.  It's
>> closely related to what Dan wrote about in:
>>
>> http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb/2006-05/msg00109.html
>>
>> and I'd like to have a go at implementing option #2 in that mail.
> 
> That (the frame unwinder end-of-stack method) wouldn't actually help
> with this problem; that's why I sent the two separately (they were
> originally the same message when I was writing it).  The architecture
> unwinder could report a saved pc of zero as terminating the stack, but
> in all the cases I'm interested in, the DWARF-2 unwinder is actually
> used for the bottom frame.
> 
>> Unfortunately I'm leaving for a a four-week trip tomorrow.  I won't be
>> able to read my mail for most of the time between now and june 17.
> 
> Well, enjoy your trip.  I have a thousand different things that need
> merging, and I'll be working on them over the coming weeks; but it
> won't do me any harm to table this one until we have time to discuss it
> further, as long as we've deliberately postponed it rather than let it
> fall through :-)
> 
> So, I shall not pursue this patch right now, and we'll discuss it later
> (probably not until July; the GCC Summit at the end of June is going to
> wreck my schedule around when you get back).  Thanks for all the
> comments!
>