* backtrace C-API @ 2003-04-18 12:33 Gerrit Bruchhäuser 2003-04-18 13:39 ` Daniel Jacobowitz 0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread From: Gerrit Bruchhäuser @ 2003-04-18 12:33 UTC (permalink / raw) To: gdb Hello, is there any C-API function in libgdb.a (or some other library) which returns a call stack (something 'bt' like)? Many thanks! // Gerrit -- +++ GMX - Mail, Messaging & more http://www.gmx.net +++ Bitte lächeln! Fotogalerie online mit GMX ohne eigene Homepage! ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: backtrace C-API 2003-04-18 12:33 backtrace C-API Gerrit Bruchhäuser @ 2003-04-18 13:39 ` Daniel Jacobowitz 2003-04-21 21:05 ` Andrew Cagney 0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread From: Daniel Jacobowitz @ 2003-04-18 13:39 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Gerrit Bruchhäuser; +Cc: gdb On Fri, Apr 18, 2003 at 02:33:27PM +0200, Gerrit Bruchhäuser wrote: > Hello, > > is there any C-API function in libgdb.a (or some other library) which > returns a call stack (something 'bt' like)? No; but you might find backtrace() useful if you're on a glibc-supported platform. -- Daniel Jacobowitz MontaVista Software Debian GNU/Linux Developer ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: backtrace C-API 2003-04-18 13:39 ` Daniel Jacobowitz @ 2003-04-21 21:05 ` Andrew Cagney 2003-04-22 0:51 ` Jason Molenda 0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread From: Andrew Cagney @ 2003-04-21 21:05 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Daniel Jacobowitz; +Cc: Gerrit Bruchhäuser, gdb > On Fri, Apr 18, 2003 at 02:33:27PM +0200, Gerrit Bruchhäuser wrote: > >> Hello, >> >> is there any C-API function in libgdb.a (or some other library) which >> returns a call stack (something 'bt' like)? > > > No; but you might find backtrace() useful if you're on a > glibc-supported platform. But there probably should. How hard is it to create a `target-self' that uses local memory, and a jump-buf for registers? The tricky bit, I see, is the symbol table assuming a single global structure. Andrew ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: backtrace C-API 2003-04-21 21:05 ` Andrew Cagney @ 2003-04-22 0:51 ` Jason Molenda 2003-04-22 17:05 ` Andrew Cagney 0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread From: Jason Molenda @ 2003-04-22 0:51 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Andrew Cagney; +Cc: Daniel Jacobowitz, Gerrit Bruchhäuser, gdb On Monday, April 21, 2003, at 02:04 PM, Andrew Cagney wrote: >> On Fri, Apr 18, 2003 at 02:33:27PM +0200, Gerrit Bruchhäuser wrote: >>> Hello, >>> is there any C-API function in libgdb.a (or some other library) which >>> returns a call stack (something 'bt' like)? >> No; but you might find backtrace() useful if you're on a >> glibc-supported platform. > > But there probably should. How hard is it to create a `target-self' > that uses local memory, and a jump-buf for registers? The tricky bit, > I see, is the symbol table assuming a single global structure. This falls into the category of Nasty Hack, but I helped someone on our compiler group with a similar problem a long time ago. I had them add a call at the site of interest which (a) got the current process' pid, (b) wrote a little gdb command script into a /tmp file which would attach to the process, bt, and detach, (c) ran system ("gdb --command=/tmp...") in the function, and (d) removed the file from /tmp. I'm sure there are better ways to handle all this, but it took about five minutes to do all this correctly -- for a one-off problem, it wasn't a bad solution. They captured stdout, massaged the output a bit, and had the info they needed. J ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: backtrace C-API 2003-04-22 0:51 ` Jason Molenda @ 2003-04-22 17:05 ` Andrew Cagney 0 siblings, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread From: Andrew Cagney @ 2003-04-22 17:05 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Jason Molenda; +Cc: Daniel Jacobowitz, Gerrit Bruchhäuser, gdb > > On Monday, April 21, 2003, at 02:04 PM, Andrew Cagney wrote: > > On Fri, Apr 18, 2003 at 02:33:27PM +0200, Gerrit Bruchhäuser wrote: > Hello, > is there any C-API function in libgdb.a (or some other library) which > returns a call stack (something 'bt' like)? > No; but you might find backtrace() useful if you're on a > glibc-supported platform. > > But there probably should. How hard is it to create a `target-self' that uses local memory, and a jump-buf for registers? The tricky bit, I see, is the symbol table assuming a single global structure. > > > This falls into the category of Nasty Hack, but I helped someone on our compiler group with a similar problem a long time ago. I had them add a call at the site of interest which (a) got the current process' pid, (b) wrote a little gdb command script into a /tmp file which would attach to the process, bt, and detach, (c) ran system ("gdb --command=/tmp...") in the function, and (d) removed the file from /tmp. > > I'm sure there are better ways to handle all this, but it took about five minutes to do all this correctly -- for a one-off problem, it wasn't a bad solution. They captured stdout, massaged the output a bit, and had the info they needed. It's actually a well accepted technique. I first learnt about it on a web page somewhere. Andrew ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2003-04-22 17:05 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 5+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed) -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2003-04-18 12:33 backtrace C-API Gerrit Bruchhäuser 2003-04-18 13:39 ` Daniel Jacobowitz 2003-04-21 21:05 ` Andrew Cagney 2003-04-22 0:51 ` Jason Molenda 2003-04-22 17:05 ` Andrew Cagney
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox; as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).