From: Tom Tromey <tromey@redhat.com>
To: Mark Kettenis <mark.kettenis@xs4all.nl>
Cc: jan.kratochvil@redhat.com, gdb-patches@sourceware.org
Subject: Re: [patch 2/2] Disable epilogue unwinders on recent GCCs [Re: Regression: Re: [PATCH] Fix some i386 unwinder inconcistencies]
Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2011 20:02:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <m3wrg567yi.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <201106270938.p5R9chh3015295@glazunov.sibelius.xs4all.nl> (Mark Kettenis's message of "Mon, 27 Jun 2011 11:38:43 +0200 (CEST)")
>>>>> "Mark" == Mark Kettenis <mark.kettenis@xs4all.nl> writes:
>> 1441 /* This restriction could be lifted if other unwinders are known to
>> 1442 compute the frame base in a way compatible with the DWARF
>> 1443 unwinder. */
>> 1444 if (! frame_unwinder_is (this_frame, &dwarf2_frame_unwind))
>> 1445 error (_("can't compute CFA for this frame"));
Mark> I still think, this code should be removed. Tom, since you added that
Mark> bit, what's your take on that?
When I wrote that I was under the impression that the different
unwinders computed the CFA differently.
If that is incorrect, and recent discussion indicates that it is, then I
think it is fine to drop this check.
Actually, the whole purpose of frame_unwinder_is and dwarf2_frame_cfa is
just to do this check. All that stuff could be removed.
Tom
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-06-28 20:02 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-06-12 20:57 [PATCH] Fix some i386 unwinder inconcistencies Mark Kettenis
2011-06-13 2:32 ` Yao Qi
2011-06-13 14:50 ` Mark Kettenis
2011-06-13 10:49 ` Regression: " Jan Kratochvil
2011-06-13 15:37 ` Mark Kettenis
2011-06-13 16:11 ` Jan Kratochvil
2011-06-13 19:10 ` Mark Kettenis
2011-06-13 20:46 ` Jan Kratochvil
2011-06-26 8:41 ` [patch 1/2] Code reformatting for patch 2/2 [Re: Regression: Re: [PATCH] Fix some i386 unwinder inconcistencies] Jan Kratochvil
2011-06-29 22:20 ` Jan Kratochvil
2011-06-26 8:42 ` [patch 2/2] Disable epilogue unwinders on recent GCCs " Jan Kratochvil
2011-06-27 9:39 ` Mark Kettenis
2011-06-28 20:02 ` Tom Tromey [this message]
2011-06-28 20:06 ` Jan Kratochvil
2011-06-29 22:26 ` Jan Kratochvil
2011-06-28 19:56 ` Tom Tromey
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=m3wrg567yi.fsf@fleche.redhat.com \
--to=tromey@redhat.com \
--cc=gdb-patches@sourceware.org \
--cc=jan.kratochvil@redhat.com \
--cc=mark.kettenis@xs4all.nl \
/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