From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 4344 invoked by alias); 23 May 2007 02:24:45 -0000 Received: (qmail 4132 invoked by uid 22791); 23 May 2007 02:24:43 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from return.false.org (HELO return.false.org) (66.207.162.98) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Wed, 23 May 2007 02:24:41 +0000 Received: from return.false.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by return.false.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3E3444B267; Tue, 22 May 2007 21:24:38 -0500 (CDT) Received: from caradoc.them.org (dsl093-172-095.pit1.dsl.speakeasy.net [66.93.172.95]) by return.false.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F1FC54B262; Tue, 22 May 2007 21:24:33 -0500 (CDT) Received: from drow by caradoc.them.org with local (Exim 4.67) (envelope-from ) id 1HqgWf-0001Ku-DA; Tue, 22 May 2007 22:24:33 -0400 Date: Wed, 23 May 2007 02:24:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: Maxim Grigoriev Cc: Jim Blandy , gdb@sourceware.org, Marc Gauthier , Ross Morley Subject: Re: Understanding GDB frames Message-ID: <20070523022433.GA4942@caradoc.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: Maxim Grigoriev , Jim Blandy , gdb@sourceware.org, Marc Gauthier , Ross Morley References: <46521C04.7040405@hq.tensilica.com> <465341B8.9060208@hq.tensilica.com> <4653924D.5030304@hq.tensilica.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4653924D.5030304@hq.tensilica.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.15 (2007-04-09) 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: 2007-05/txt/msg00131.txt.bz2 On Tue, May 22, 2007 at 06:01:01PM -0700, Maxim Grigoriev wrote: > Anyway, doesn't it look like a reasonably inexpensive improvement ? Why should we improve it this way? I haven't seen any compelling reason. Jim's already said that you can't rely on frame ID equality in all cases - this stuff is tricky to reason about, which is exactly why we try not to export the frame IDs to the MI client. -- Daniel Jacobowitz CodeSourcery