From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 13924 invoked by alias); 22 Jul 2004 13:04:13 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 13899 invoked from network); 22 Jul 2004 13:04:09 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO nevyn.them.org) (66.93.172.17) by sourceware.org with SMTP; 22 Jul 2004 13:04:09 -0000 Received: from drow by nevyn.them.org with local (Exim 4.34 #1 (Debian)) id 1BndDy-0003jn-7S; Thu, 22 Jul 2004 09:03:02 -0400 Date: Thu, 22 Jul 2004 15:17:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: Dave Korn Cc: 'Mark Kettenis' , eliz@gnu.org, cagney@gnu.org, gdb@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [6.2] PROBLEMS file Message-ID: <20040722130301.GA14326@nevyn.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: Dave Korn , 'Mark Kettenis' , eliz@gnu.org, cagney@gnu.org, gdb@sources.redhat.com References: <200407212059.i6LKxgQ9019045@copland.kettenis.dyndns.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.5.1+cvs20040105i X-SW-Source: 2004-07/txt/msg00281.txt.bz2 On Thu, Jul 22, 2004 at 01:13:19PM +0100, Dave Korn wrote: > > -----Original Message----- > > From: gdb-owner On Behalf Of Mark Kettenis > > Sent: 21 July 2004 22:00 > > > shouldn't terminate the backtrace. And %eip == 0 can happen in the > > case of a null-pointer function call. > > Does it? I thought the stored eip on the stack points to the return > address of the caller, which is the byte after the call instruction, so eip > = 0 would only occur in a stack frame if there was a call instruction at > 0xfffffffb that had just been executed? Consider a SIGSEGV handler invoked in response to a NULL pointer call. -- Daniel Jacobowitz