From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 25774 invoked by alias); 20 Sep 2002 03:30:47 -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 25762 invoked from network); 20 Sep 2002 03:30:44 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO localhost.redhat.com) (216.138.202.10) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 20 Sep 2002 03:30:44 -0000 Received: from ges.redhat.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2E77C3DD2 for ; Thu, 19 Sep 2002 23:30:42 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <3D8A9662.1080902@ges.redhat.com> Date: Thu, 19 Sep 2002 20:30:00 -0000 From: Andrew Cagney User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; NetBSD macppc; en-US; rv:1.0.0) Gecko/20020824 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: gdb@sources.redhat.com Subject: [rfc] Add per frame frame_saved_pc() Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2002-09/txt/msg00301.txt.bz2 Hello, Back to (trumpet noises) CFI and more fall-out from the MIPS and generic dummy frames. - The CFI doco describes a ``return_address_register'' which ``[...] might not correspond to a machine register''. This means a CFI specific frame saved PC method. - Given a generic dummy frame, it knows exactly where the callers frame PC is. No need to ask the target code. With this in mind, I'd like to propose making frame_saved_pc() a per-frame method. Thoughts? To be honest, it is largely motivated by me having to wade though the MIPS code and add if(PC_IN_CALL_DUMMY()) to everything - I'm hopeing to avoid it next time :-) After this is comes FRAME_CHAIN() but I think that needs more careful consideration. Andrew