From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gdb-return-8366-listarch-gdb=sourceware.cygnus.com@sources.redhat.com>
Received: (qmail 10377 invoked by alias); 9 Apr 2002 17:58:12 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gdb-subscribe@sources.redhat.com>
List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/gdb/>
List-Post: <mailto:gdb@sources.redhat.com>
List-Help: <mailto:gdb-help@sources.redhat.com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender: gdb-owner@sources.redhat.com
Received: (qmail 10351 invoked from network); 9 Apr 2002 17:58:10 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO dberlin.org) (64.246.6.106)
  by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 9 Apr 2002 17:58:10 -0000
Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1])
	by dberlin.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g39Hw9m13602;
	Tue, 9 Apr 2002 13:58:09 -0400
Date: Tue, 09 Apr 2002 10:58:00 -0000
From: Daniel Berlin <dan@dberlin.org>
To: Andrew Cagney <ac131313@cygnus.com>
cc: gdb@sources.redhat.com
Subject: Re: think-o: dwarf2 CFA != frame->frame (x86-64)
In-Reply-To: <3CB325BD.6030003@cygnus.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0204091357260.11863-100000@dberlin.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
X-SW-Source: 2002-04/txt/msg00135.txt.bz2

On Tue, 9 Apr 2002, Andrew Cagney wrote:

> 
> >> See:
> >> 
> >> http://sources.redhat.com/cgi-bin/gnatsweb.pl?cmd=view%20audit-trail&database=gdb&pr=466
> >> 
> > 
> > 
> > Sorry, this is incorrect.
> > When debug_frame info is present, it is the *only* way used to 
> > retrieve register values.
> > There is no mixture of methods.
>  >
> > Even in my case, either the executable contains .debug_frame info, and we 
> > use it for *all* cases, or it doesn't, and we use it for *no* cases.
> > There is no mixture.
> > 
> > There will never be a mixture of methods (unless you do something illegal, 
> > like attempt to use the .eh_frame section, which contains stack unwinding 
> > only for routines throwing exceptions)
> 
> Please re-read what I wrote.

You said " The problem is that this algorithm assumes that each frame uses 
the same mechanism for locating register values.  With
                       the introduction of dwarf2cfi, this is no longer 
true.  Some frames may use the debug info while others may use the
                       old prologue analysis technique.
"

You are incorrect.
It's an either-or case. Never is their a mixture of methods, unless you do 
something illegal.

> 
> Andrew
>