From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 21812 invoked by alias); 6 Apr 2016 16:30:32 -0000 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 Received: (qmail 21788 invoked by uid 89); 6 Apr 2016 16:30:30 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-2.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy= X-HELO: mx1.redhat.com Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with (AES256-GCM-SHA384 encrypted) ESMTPS; Wed, 06 Apr 2016 16:30:29 +0000 Received: from int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.22]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 251AFD7FE7; Wed, 6 Apr 2016 16:30:28 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (ovpn01.gateway.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.9.1]) by int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id u36GUQ1G008856; Wed, 6 Apr 2016 12:30:27 -0400 Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] Teach arm unwinders to terminate gracefully To: Yao Qi References: <1452188697-23870-1-git-send-email-antoine.tremblay@ericsson.com> <1452188697-23870-2-git-send-email-antoine.tremblay@ericsson.com> <86io1ung0a.fsf@gmail.com> <56CEE928.2080704@redhat.com> <86h9fen367.fsf@gmail.com> Cc: Antoine Tremblay , gdb-patches@sourceware.org From: Pedro Alves Message-ID: <570539A2.9060509@redhat.com> Date: Wed, 06 Apr 2016 16:30:00 -0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.7.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <86h9fen367.fsf@gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2016-04/txt/msg00133.txt.bz2 On 04/06/2016 04:54 PM, Yao Qi wrote: > I write some code to implement your suggestion here, and it looks OK > except that I can't get PC to pass to frame_id_build_unavailable_stack, > since PC is extracted from frame cache which varies on different archs > and unwinders. Hmm, I think I'm confused, since the PC is extracted/unwound from the _next_ frame, not the one we're building the cache for? See get_frame_pc / get_frame_pc_if_available. Thanks, Pedro Alves