Re: The gdb x86 function prologue parser

[Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>]

> Date: Sun, 12 Jun 2005 09:07:29 +0200 (CEST)
> From: Mark Kettenis <mark.kettenis@xs4all.nl>
> CC: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
> 
> Being able to debug -fomit-frame-pointer code without CFI probably
> means that instead of scanning the prologue, we'll have to scan the
> complete function up to the current instruction pointer.  I really
> wonder if that's the way we should go.

If this might make sense in some, possibly rare, situations, how about
if we do that conditioned on some user option?  It is IMHO much better
to have some way of dealing with such code than to have none.

> assuming that a function
> has set up a stack frame isn't right; it makes gdb silently skip
> function calls in backtraces.  That can be very confusing.  As I've
> stated before, I'd rather have a backtrace that's obviously wrong than
> one that silently omits things.

Again, a user option, off by default, that would produce a backtrace
with possibly omitted frames rather than a blatantly botched one,
could be a Good Thing here.

Just my $0.02.