From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 12084 invoked by alias); 22 May 2009 14:43:09 -0000 Received: (qmail 12072 invoked by uid 22791); 22 May 2009 14:43:07 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,FS_NEW_XXX X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from rock.gnat.com (HELO rock.gnat.com) (205.232.38.15) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Fri, 22 May 2009 14:43:00 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by filtered-rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A97192BAB44; Fri, 22 May 2009 10:42:58 -0400 (EDT) Received: from rock.gnat.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (rock.gnat.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id bpWmKdwT8wEA; Fri, 22 May 2009 10:42:58 -0400 (EDT) Received: from joel.gnat.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 882DA2BABFE; Fri, 22 May 2009 10:42:57 -0400 (EDT) Received: by joel.gnat.com (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 78526F5965; Fri, 22 May 2009 16:42:55 +0200 (CEST) Date: Fri, 22 May 2009 14:43:00 -0000 From: Joel Brobecker To: Florent DEFAY Cc: jeremy.bennett@embecosm.com, Anthony Berent , gdb@sourceware.org Subject: Re: new port Message-ID: <20090522144255.GB23036@adacore.com> References: <8502af3c0905140623nece4f1dv1e03c2c841c59e42@mail.gmail.com> <1242311828.2994.39.camel@thomas> <8502af3c0905200126v68b6d474g9ee399bc163e8b5@mail.gmail.com> <20090520141243.GE17566@adacore.com> <8502af3c0905220524w71078d01kb4d95dc303775c2@mail.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <8502af3c0905220524w71078d01kb4d95dc303775c2@mail.gmail.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) 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: 2009-05/txt/msg00146.txt.bz2 > What should return target_frame_base_address? The base of the frame? > Even when it is not a given register? AFAIK, that's correct (again, look at the example of i386-tdep). > Stack level 0, frame at 0x3fca: > pc = 0x40 in add15 (main.c:8); saved pc 0x32a > Outermost frame: unwinder did not report frame ID > source language c. > Arglist at 0x3fc4, args: a=25 > Locals at 0x3fc4, Previous frame's sp is 0x3fca > Saved registers: > pc at 0x3fca > _______________________________________________ > > What is shocking me is "Outermost frame: unwinder did not report frame ID" > and "Previous frame's sp" which has the same value as "frame at". I assume that frame 0 is for the call to "foo". What does "bt" say in this situation? -- Joel