Mirror of the gdb-patches mailing list
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jim Blandy <jimb@red-bean.com>
To: Randolph Chung <randolph@tausq.org>
Cc: Joel Brobecker <brobecker@adacore.com>, gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
Subject: Re: [hppa] FYI: confusion in unwind descriptor field meaning
Date: Sat, 12 Nov 2005 05:07:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <8f2776cb0511112022k746e7909r24be2e964dd45a13@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4375624D.1070202@tausq.org>

On 11/11/05, Randolph Chung <randolph@tausq.org> wrote:
> >>For that matter, how do you find the beginning of the function without
> >>unwind data?
> >
> > Linker symbols.  If you don't have them, then prologue analysis isn't useful.
>
> This is what I meant - on hppa, even without linker symbols, we can
> still do prologue analysis because the ABI mandates unwind records. So
> we can actually do unwinding more robustly based on the unwind records.
> This is especially useful when you have mixed code compiled with
> different flags and/or have been stripped.

Hmm.  Is it possible to find a function's entry point from a PC within
that function's code given only the unwind records?  If the detailed
contents of the unwind records are difficult to interpret accurately,
but we can accurately recover entry points from them, and prologue
analysis works, then we could use the unwind records *only* to
discover entry points, and then use prologue analysis to actually get
the unwind information.

I'm sounding like some kind of prologue analysis fanatic here, but
really I'm not.   We should make the best use of the techniques and
information available, and it sounds to me like prologue analysis is
comparable with the alternatives here, if we can find the information
it needs.


  reply	other threads:[~2005-11-12  4:22 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2005-11-09 23:55 Joel Brobecker
2005-11-10  1:27 ` Randolph Chung
2005-11-10  1:31   ` Joel Brobecker
2005-11-10  1:32     ` Randolph Chung
2005-11-10 19:18 ` Randolph Chung
2005-11-11 11:22   ` Joel Brobecker
2005-11-12  3:32     ` Randolph Chung
2005-11-12  4:22       ` Jim Blandy
2005-11-12  4:39         ` Jim Blandy
2005-11-12  4:59         ` Randolph Chung
2005-11-12  5:07           ` Jim Blandy [this message]
2005-11-12 13:21             ` Randolph Chung
2005-11-12 17:08               ` Jim Blandy
2005-11-13 15:38                 ` Randolph Chung
2005-11-13 18:27                   ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2005-11-19 19:15                     ` Randolph Chung
2005-11-13 18:23               ` Joel Brobecker
2005-11-13 18:28                 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2005-11-13 18:36                   ` Joel Brobecker
2005-11-13 18:45                     ` Daniel Jacobowitz

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=8f2776cb0511112022k746e7909r24be2e964dd45a13@mail.gmail.com \
    --to=jimb@red-bean.com \
    --cc=brobecker@adacore.com \
    --cc=gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com \
    --cc=randolph@tausq.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox