From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 8137 invoked by alias); 1 Jul 2003 00:57:51 -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 8124 invoked from network); 1 Jul 2003 00:57:49 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO localhost.redhat.com) (24.157.166.107) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 1 Jul 2003 00:57:49 -0000 Received: from redhat.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6BFEA2B5F; Mon, 30 Jun 2003 20:57:48 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <3F00DC8C.5040908@redhat.com> Date: Tue, 01 Jul 2003 00:57:00 -0000 From: Andrew Cagney User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; NetBSD macppc; en-US; rv:1.0.2) Gecko/20030223 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Jim Blandy Cc: gdb@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: IBM S/390 prologue analysis revisited References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2003-07/txt/msg00002.txt.bz2 > I'd like to revisit the question of how to proceed with the s390 frame > unwinding / prologue analysis code. I'd like to commit my prologue > analysis changes, but the IBM GDB folks have expressed a general > interest in keeping the prologue analysis logic minimal and using > Dwarf CFI everywhere. So I'd like to outline my reasons, and see what > the community thinks is the best approach to take. You mean: [just for the record]: new prologue analyzer for S/390 http://sources.redhat.com/ml/gdb-patches/2003-04/msg00352.html I thought the conclusion was that it could/should go in anyway. As for IBM and the s390. http://www10.software.ibm.com/developerworks/opensource/linux390/current2_4_19-may2002.shtml#debug20030416 > Note: This patch changes gdb common code in a manner that might cause problems for other platforms. Use the debugger sources created by appyling this patch only to build a debugger for the s390 or s390x architectures. Yes, someone needs to get CFI working, but that isn't the way to do it :-( Andrew