From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48) id 90192385842B; Sun, 2 Apr 2023 23:42:42 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 90192385842B DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sourceware.org; s=default; t=1680478962; bh=6PLj4GktDHpMajdZLmCjKO/83uHbu5DEDqwne609pwA=; h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=H3k8xTZKFbBcSyjPquAZFuoyeFzmfBivzTRENtrdO1QReLDVXUG4eBsCNxC49nrJM KaUE4zCb4c8iUpSoq6smTE7ePmJdepKtyxTsR0m0GE8BIsEyPrrrDf1+AfZ2PnnNJG tFO+/KKaubtskRpvZsTd8N1o+jqy3NZrXtxrfPdM= From: "godlygeek at gmail dot com" To: elfutils-devel@sourceware.org Subject: [Bug libdw/30272] Unwinding multithreaded musl applications fails Date: Sun, 02 Apr 2023 23:42:41 +0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: elfutils X-Bugzilla-Component: libdw X-Bugzilla-Version: unspecified X-Bugzilla-Keywords: X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal X-Bugzilla-Who: godlygeek at gmail dot com X-Bugzilla-Status: UNCONFIRMED X-Bugzilla-Resolution: X-Bugzilla-Priority: P2 X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at sourceware dot org X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: --- X-Bugzilla-Flags: X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Bugzilla-URL: http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated MIME-Version: 1.0 List-Id: https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D30272 --- Comment #1 from Matt Wozniski --- I encountered this issue using `dwfl_getthread_frames`, and I've found that calling `dwfl_frame_reg` to check if the stack pointer register was the same for two frames in a row and breaking out if so seems to work around it. I'm= not sure if that's entirely correct, though. Are there any legitimate cases whe= re two different frames passed to the callback would have the same stack point= er? My impression is that the stack pointer should change for every function ca= ll because the return address is stored on the stack, but perhaps there are so= me architectures where that isn't the case... --=20 You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.=