From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 29365 invoked by alias); 3 Dec 2005 05:43:14 -0000 Received: (qmail 29358 invoked by uid 22791); 3 Dec 2005 05:43:14 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from zproxy.gmail.com (HELO zproxy.gmail.com) (64.233.162.192) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Sat, 03 Dec 2005 05:43:13 +0000 Received: by zproxy.gmail.com with SMTP id x3so327500nzd for ; Fri, 02 Dec 2005 21:43:12 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.36.9.18 with SMTP id 18mr3364222nzi; Fri, 02 Dec 2005 21:43:12 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.37.2.6 with HTTP; Fri, 2 Dec 2005 21:43:12 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <8f2776cb0512022143y27cbcfcat3cbcd1c2a49e6286@mail.gmail.com> Date: Sun, 04 Dec 2005 21:22:00 -0000 From: Jim Blandy To: Jim Blandy , pgilliam@us.ibm.com, gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] add 'rs6000_in_function_epilogue_p()' In-Reply-To: <20051203045349.GA24721@nevyn.them.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline References: <200511301225.56802.pgilliam@us.ibm.com> <8f2776cb0512011707p120df411w3a685c453d4ec625@mail.gmail.com> <20051202011703.GA27515@nevyn.them.org> <200512021146.54036.pgilliam@us.ibm.com> <8f2776cb0512021419w5af03946je07634a4400417fd@mail.gmail.com> <20051203030533.GA23195@nevyn.them.org> <8f2776cb0512022020i655a67c1td120a61ed5f4154e@mail.gmail.com> <20051203045349.GA24721@nevyn.them.org> X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2005-12/txt/msg00084.txt.bz2 On 12/2/05, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote: > Fascinating. So, do both prologue and epilogue recognition. It would > be useful for backtraces in epilogues, but not for much else, and it > would be a lot of work, so I have trouble seeing this get implemented. > But, maybe. Well, I was suggesting that Paul do it, you see. :) (I don't think it'd be that much work.) > Of course this is only useful without CFI and the main reason PPC > doesn't use CFI has been solved. And the problem is likely to > reoccur with CFI that doesn't describe the epilogue, which today is > prevalent. As I've always said, compiler-provided CFI is better.