From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 12199 invoked by alias); 8 Feb 2007 23:00:56 -0000 Received: (qmail 12184 invoked by uid 22791); 8 Feb 2007 23:00:54 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from nevyn.them.org (HELO nevyn.them.org) (66.93.172.17) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31.1) with ESMTP; Thu, 08 Feb 2007 23:00:42 +0000 Received: from drow by nevyn.them.org with local (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1HFIFl-0001GG-ON; Thu, 08 Feb 2007 18:00:33 -0500 Date: Thu, 08 Feb 2007 23:00:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: Mark Kettenis Cc: brobecker@adacore.com, Wiljan.Derks@zonnet.nl, gdb@sourceware.org Subject: Re: How to tell gdb about dlls using remote protocol Message-ID: <20070208230033.GB4258@nevyn.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: Mark Kettenis , brobecker@adacore.com, Wiljan.Derks@zonnet.nl, gdb@sourceware.org References: <003f01c7457c$0f2d8090$9600000a@kamer> <20070131223113.GA15122@nevyn.them.org> <20070201175311.GG17864@adacore.com> <200702072214.l17MER45023107@brahms.sibelius.xs4all.nl> <20070207221644.GA26833@nevyn.them.org> <200702082114.l18LEbGk029498@brahms.sibelius.xs4all.nl> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200702082114.l18LEbGk029498@brahms.sibelius.xs4all.nl> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11) X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2007-02/txt/msg00050.txt.bz2 On Thu, Feb 08, 2007 at 10:14:37PM +0100, Mark Kettenis wrote: > Me neither. However, Joel's diff has a problem: it makes the > signull.exp tests fail. They explicitly test calling a null pointer, > and that case is now caught by Joel's check. Skipping a frame in that > case is not acceptable to me. > > I'm currently testing chaning Joel's original: > > else if (cache->pc == 0) > > into: > > else if (cache->pc == 0 && frame_pc_unwind (next_frame) != 0) > > What do you think of that? Can we actually check for a failure to find the start address? Using pc == 0 is unfortunate - we keep encountering people who link code at zero. Oh, I guess there's no way; we already use the pc != 0 check in the same function. -- Daniel Jacobowitz CodeSourcery