From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-qv1-xf44.google.com (mail-qv1-xf44.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::f44]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0038B3945C2A for ; Fri, 13 Mar 2020 13:31:29 +0000 (GMT) Received: by mail-qv1-xf44.google.com with SMTP id n1so753026qvz.4 for ; Fri, 13 Mar 2020 06:31:29 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language :content-transfer-encoding; bh=xm9+kv0Ezqmdp3eAP2MKb+k0BPR6PduUtP5gAAYKo4A=; b=IxEc7c69rhCMnDf/kap1438LWk8LcRTl+Z5g32H4ebuQoE5uXXLOz/wo+8BGmaBY+r /CNdmuVjwPecjnWdSs+uZv8io18bnR2fqJEQTcq17c0ytZeN7JssZrc+GtbRqw3udaOZ QNqUCtENCRR70Map6AqsIzlu/hGh/zZEUwJy7xrAIYZnpmRdx29jFNNeyRKzD2UH5WV0 3d55OfW4X6NH0WD2knLfXx2u8owi0a4PDBrX4kFI7xHjVWz5h321ewn1bmsW7Ypx1YLW tZWZCKwh2m+D+by5OBDae0S4q4rWAAeR4RfHfk0y1rGyA/2fR541JkvS/iKiLpMWf15A mwDA== X-Gm-Message-State: ANhLgQ3zaPe0gxMV0v/fCipqODNrmQdvGEbdFoG3bWpyKYN/ch8+zm7C rH4u7cdIb1SGNl8YX7oB1ceWJRLdDkw= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ADFU+vv/lGIqOscjS3nMS02zFVzNVjpkGDqRS6eAjXy2QYGRwQOWkNqdG+qwnKANwKaDZtDwCw5rjg== X-Received: by 2002:ad4:4a89:: with SMTP id h9mr12339026qvx.168.1584106289120; Fri, 13 Mar 2020 06:31:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.0.185] ([191.34.221.205]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id g4sm7741379qki.8.2020.03.13.06.31.26 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Fri, 13 Mar 2020 06:31:28 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: [PATCH] Find tailcall frames before inline frames To: Tom Tromey Cc: Tom Tromey , gdb-patches@sourceware.org References: <20200220155820.22809-1-tromey@adacore.com> <87sgip6rk9.fsf@tromey.com> <665eda59-ae52-42f4-b3b2-e3a070036ca8@linaro.org> <8736adi7f5.fsf@tromey.com> From: Luis Machado Message-ID: <9b864a68-3c28-9c25-6e3d-252777143e52@linaro.org> Date: Fri, 13 Mar 2020 10:31:23 -0300 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.4.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <8736adi7f5.fsf@tromey.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.1 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, DKIM_VALID_EF, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE, SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on server2.sourceware.org X-BeenThere: gdb-patches@sourceware.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Gdb-patches mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 13 Mar 2020 13:31:30 -0000 On 3/12/20 6:34 PM, Tom Tromey wrote: >>>>>> "Luis" == Luis Machado writes: > > Luis> This has caused quite a few failures in the following tests for > Luis> aarch64-linux: > > I still haven't really tried to reproduce this yet. > I'll try tomorrow, I hope. > > Luis> ../../../repos/binutils-gdb/gdb/frame.c:579: internal-error: frame_id > Luis> get_frame_id(frame_info*): Assertion `fi->level == 0' failed. > > Meanwhile I wonder if this is the same as > > https://sourceware.org/pipermail/gdb-patches/2020-February/165511.html > > Tom > The mention of fi->level looks the same, but i haven't looked into it yet. I was planning to pinpoint the failure point in order to make this easier to solve.