From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 22904 invoked by alias); 9 May 2005 05:26:11 -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 22452 invoked by uid 22791); 9 May 2005 05:26:00 -0000 Received: from c-66-30-17-189.hsd1.ma.comcast.net (HELO cgf.cx) (66.30.17.189) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.30-dev) with ESMTP; Mon, 09 May 2005 05:26:00 +0000 Received: by cgf.cx (Postfix, from userid 201) id 0D0B613CC2D; Mon, 9 May 2005 01:25:59 -0400 (EDT) Date: Mon, 09 May 2005 05:26:00 -0000 From: Christopher Faylor To: roland.schwingel@onevision.de, gdb@sourceware.org, Eli Zaretskii Subject: Re: gdb stack trace problems (Addendum) Message-ID: <20050509052559.GA15582@trixie.casa.cgf.cx> Mail-Followup-To: roland.schwingel@onevision.de, gdb@sourceware.org, Eli Zaretskii References: <4275D0AC.8000205@onevision.de> <200505081330.j48DUKQc012365@elgar.sibelius.xs4all.nl> <20050508231953.GG3896@trixie.casa.cgf.cx> <01c55452$Blat.v2.4$03d6fe00@zahav.net.il> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <01c55452$Blat.v2.4$03d6fe00@zahav.net.il> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.8i X-SW-Source: 2005-05/txt/msg00101.txt.bz2 On Mon, May 09, 2005 at 07:45:05AM +0300, Eli Zaretskii wrote: >> Date: Sun, 8 May 2005 19:19:53 -0400 >> From: Christopher Faylor >> >> What kind of windows-specific solution do you have in mind? How would >> you know what to unwind? You could potentially figure out that you're >> stuck in a system function but that doesn't mean that you know the >> state of the stack. >> >> If a function doesn't set up a frame pointer and there is no debugging >> information available, how would one derive a stack frame? I could >> imagine a really complicated "search the stack" technique but I can't >> see how it would ever be foolproof. > >Does the MSVC debugger manage to display a sensible backtrace in this >case? If it does not, we don't need to worry, I think. Possibly. They may have some separate debugging symbol files available for system DLLs. I'm not extremely interested in making gdb understand native MSVC debugging format though. >If it does, then perhaps teh frameless functions in system DLLs follow >some pattern in their prologue that could help us? Or perhaps they >save stack-related info in some Windows-specific place? I've never noticed anything special on the stack or in the assembly language. I'm not 100% sure that the system functions are written in C. cgf