From: Andrew Cagney <ac131313@redhat.com>
To: gdb@sources.redhat.com
Subject: frame->unwind->this_base()
Date: Sun, 16 Mar 2003 22:04:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <3E74F4F4.50003@redhat.com> (raw)
At present there is a per-frame ID method since different frames
determine their ID using different techniques. The ID (which identifies
a given frame instance) includes a base and pc/func value.
GDB's frame code also makes available the get_frame_base() method.
While the default implementation returns get_frame_id().base, I think
there is going to need to be a per-frame frame->unwind->this_base method.
For dwarf2 frames, it would return, DW_AT_frame_base. For prologue
frames, it would return an attempt at an equivalent value. Hopefully it
wouldn't be called for other frame types :-).
It might even be reasonable for a prologue based unwinder to error out
when asked for the frame's base before the stack frame has been created.
Thoughts?
I should note that dwarf2expr.c contains code that tries to
locally/directly evaluate the frame base. I think that should instead
do a get_frame_base() call.
Andrew
next reply other threads:[~2003-03-16 22:04 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2003-03-16 22:04 Andrew Cagney [this message]
2003-03-16 22:10 ` frame->unwind->this_base() Daniel Jacobowitz
2003-03-17 0:09 ` frame->unwind->this_base() Andrew Cagney
2003-03-17 0:14 ` frame->unwind->this_base() Daniel Jacobowitz
2003-03-17 16:22 ` frame->unwind->this_base() Andrew Cagney
2003-03-17 16:38 ` frame->unwind->this_base() Daniel Jacobowitz
2003-03-17 16:56 ` frame->unwind->this_base() Andrew Cagney
2003-03-17 17:11 ` frame->unwind->this_base() Daniel Jacobowitz
2003-03-17 18:20 ` frame->unwind->this_base() Andrew Cagney
2003-03-17 19:35 ` frame->unwind->this_base() Daniel Jacobowitz
2003-03-18 4:29 ` frame->unwind->this_base() Andrew Cagney
2003-03-18 5:13 ` frame->unwind->this_base() Daniel Jacobowitz
2003-03-18 15:22 ` frame->unwind->this_base() Andrew Cagney
2003-03-18 16:38 ` frame->unwind->this_base() Daniel Jacobowitz
2003-03-18 17:02 ` frame->unwind->this_base() Andrew Cagney
2003-03-18 17:11 ` frame->unwind->this_base() Daniel Jacobowitz
2003-03-18 17:28 ` frame->unwind->this_base() Andrew Cagney
2003-03-18 17:38 ` frame->unwind->this_base() Daniel Jacobowitz
2003-03-18 20:22 ` frame->unwind->this_base() Andrew Cagney
2003-03-19 14:11 ` frame->unwind->this_base() Daniel Jacobowitz
2003-03-19 15:24 ` frame->unwind->this_base() Andrew Cagney
2003-03-19 15:32 ` frame->unwind->this_base() Daniel Jacobowitz
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=3E74F4F4.50003@redhat.com \
--to=ac131313@redhat.com \
--cc=gdb@sources.redhat.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox