From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48) id A6DDD3858D39; Thu, 19 Jan 2023 14:28:35 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org A6DDD3858D39 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sourceware.org; s=default; t=1674138515; bh=+2EPG46OW4nf42dd1F6IqKry1YQyaZtwfbENcKm8Y/Y=; h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=L/uurr/3/B6nNMySoNdNqWuYx3Mw7hAYhZYFnhz+8NzuQvM0/bGcGbGe8iIxtLciS eMDKy24xTviBfzaug99fH2cD9YcO6Kfu3/C6/c0ACS/u/9qzia8g7TSfm4aYCBF2Ev OgY8x6Haz4VrtrKPSaFvrElSiGDe65NI0b6WXePw= From: "blarsen at redhat dot com" To: gdb-prs@sourceware.org Subject: [Bug record/29721] [gdb, record, aarch64] FAIL: gdb.reverse/solib-precsave.exp: reverse-next third shr1 Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2023 14:28:35 +0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: gdb X-Bugzilla-Component: record X-Bugzilla-Version: HEAD X-Bugzilla-Keywords: X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal X-Bugzilla-Who: blarsen at redhat dot com X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW 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=3D29721 --- Comment #30 from B. Larsen --- > Say we assume that they are equal if the target contains an epilogue unwi= nder, but if not, we're handling things more conservatively. This kind of = fix could be backported to fix the regression that was introduced. This sounds ok, but I wonder if "handling things more conservatively" will regress [record/16678](https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D16= 678). To fix that bug I assumed that we knew the frame ID would be the same throughout the whole function. If we can't rely on that, how are we suppose= d to detect a breakpoint being hit in a recursive call? --=20 You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.=