From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 4896 invoked by alias); 4 Aug 2012 01:58:56 -0000 Received: (qmail 4887 invoked by uid 22791); 4 Aug 2012 01:58:55 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.5 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,KHOP_RCVD_UNTRUST,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_W,SPF_HELO_PASS,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Sat, 04 Aug 2012 01:58:38 +0000 Received: from int-mx01.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx01.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.11]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id q741wcpD030490 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK) for ; Fri, 3 Aug 2012 21:58:38 -0400 Received: from barimba (ovpn01.gateway.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.9.1]) by int-mx01.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id q741waLw032462 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Fri, 3 Aug 2012 21:58:37 -0400 From: Tom Tromey To: Jan Kratochvil Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: RFC: one approach to fixing PR 14100 References: <87r4rpqnng.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> <877gtgneto.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> <20120803210203.GA21083@host2.jankratochvil.net> Date: Sat, 04 Aug 2012 01:58:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: <20120803210203.GA21083@host2.jankratochvil.net> (Jan Kratochvil's message of "Fri, 3 Aug 2012 23:02:03 +0200") Message-ID: <87k3xfl8oj.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.1 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain 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: 2012-08/txt/msg00130.txt.bz2 >>>>> "Jan" == Jan Kratochvil writes: Jan> #5 0x00000000103e071c in internal_error (file=0x1065c308 "frame.c", Jan> line=2396, string=0x1065c2e8 "%s: Assertion `%s' failed.") at Jan> utils.c:882 Jan> #6 0x00000000103f12f4 in frame_cleanup_after_sniffer Jan> (arg=0x100106162f0) at frame.c:2396 It's more useful to see where it was originally thrown; or to see what sniffer is failing. Jan> This patch could not be x86* regression tested. It wasn't. Jan> This is because dwarf2_tailcall_sniffer_first at the end of Jan> dwarf2_frame_cache needs to have THIS_FRAME already finalized, Jan> therefore with the cache, as it needs to access the previous Jan> (unwound) frame. Then we need a cleanup instead. I'll look at it on Monday. Tom