From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 4561 invoked by alias); 23 Sep 2009 20:28:53 -0000 Received: (qmail 4553 invoked by uid 22791); 23 Sep 2009 20:28:53 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.5 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Wed, 23 Sep 2009 20:28:48 +0000 Received: from int-mx05.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx05.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.18]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n8NKSl6I003250; Wed, 23 Sep 2009 16:28:47 -0400 Received: from stone.twiddle.home (vpn-240-91.phx2.redhat.com [10.3.240.91]) by int-mx05.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n8NKSkgX018512; Wed, 23 Sep 2009 16:28:47 -0400 Message-ID: <4ABA84F9.9090202@redhat.com> Date: Wed, 23 Sep 2009 20:28:00 -0000 From: Richard Henderson User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.1.1) Gecko/20090814 Fedora/3.0-2.6.b3.fc11 Thunderbird/3.0b3 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: IainS CC: GCC Development Subject: Re: question on dwarf2 debug-frame. References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-owner@gcc.gnu.org X-SW-Source: 2009-09/txt/msg00478.txt.bz2 On 09/23/2009 11:00 AM, IainS wrote: > DW_CFA_restore (5) > Assertion failed: (reg_state_pos != cie->initial_state.regs.end()), > function ParseInstructions, file > /SourceCache/dwarf_utilities/dwarf_utilities-49/source/DWARFDebugFrame.cpp, > line 353. > Abort trap There could be some confusion in DW_CFA_restore vs DW_CFA_same_value, though I don't know on whose side it is. Certainly the existing consumers that I know treat a DW_CFA_restore for a register not mentioned by the CIE the same as "same_value". r~