From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 24003 invoked by alias); 24 Aug 2011 19:08:22 -0000 Received: (qmail 23994 invoked by uid 22791); 24 Aug 2011 19:08:21 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.8 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_SOFTFAIL,TW_WH X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mail-yw0-f41.google.com (HELO mail-yw0-f41.google.com) (209.85.213.41) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Wed, 24 Aug 2011 19:08:07 +0000 Received: by ywm13 with SMTP id 13so1193441ywm.0 for ; Wed, 24 Aug 2011 12:08:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.142.149.39 with SMTP id w39mr2831449wfd.255.1314212885620; Wed, 24 Aug 2011 12:08:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [127.0.0.1] ([203.110.240.178]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id a11sm613860wff.0.2011.08.24.12.08.02 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Wed, 24 Aug 2011 12:08:04 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <4E554D1A.7070409@playingwithpointers.com> Date: Wed, 24 Aug 2011 19:08:00 -0000 From: Sanjoy Das User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.2.18) Gecko/20110626 Icedove/3.1.11 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Jan Kratochvil CC: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/7] New JIT unwinder. References: <1314212467-7391-1-git-send-email-sanjoy@playingwithpointers.com> <1314212467-7391-7-git-send-email-sanjoy@playingwithpointers.com> <20110824190420.GA12935@host1.jankratochvil.net> In-Reply-To: <20110824190420.GA12935@host1.jankratochvil.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2011-08/txt/msg00459.txt.bz2 On Thursday 25 August 2011 12:34 AM, Jan Kratochvil wrote: > On Wed, 24 Aug 2011 21:01:06 +0200, Sanjoy Das wrote: >> Introduce a "proxy unwinder", whcih will pass down all calls to the >> functions the JIT reader provides. > > Still incorrect assumptions target_gdbarch == get_frame_arch (frame). > You should use get_frame_arch (frame) instead. > > While it currently affects only SPU if GDB supports one day across-RPC (remote > procedure calls in general) debugging it woule be also a problem. > > OTOH I guess there are probably already some places not conforming to this. > > > Thanks, > Jan Sorry, will correct. -- Sanjoy Das http://playingwithpointers.com