From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gdb-return-14080-listarch-gdb=sources.redhat.com@sources.redhat.com>
Received: (qmail 10982 invoked by alias); 3 Jun 2003 17:38:01 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gdb-subscribe@sources.redhat.com>
List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/gdb/>
List-Post: <mailto:gdb@sources.redhat.com>
List-Help: <mailto:gdb-help@sources.redhat.com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender: gdb-owner@sources.redhat.com
Received: (qmail 10965 invoked from network); 3 Jun 2003 17:38:00 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (66.187.233.31)
  by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 3 Jun 2003 17:38:00 -0000
Received: from int-mx2.corp.redhat.com (nat-pool-rdu-dmz.redhat.com [172.16.52.200] (may be forged))
	by mx1.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h53HbxH15095
	for <gdb@sources.redhat.com>; Tue, 3 Jun 2003 13:38:00 -0400
Received: from potter.sfbay.redhat.com (potter.sfbay.redhat.com [172.16.27.15])
	by int-mx2.corp.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h53HbuT18772;
	Tue, 3 Jun 2003 13:37:57 -0400
Received: from dot.sfbay.redhat.com (dot.sfbay.redhat.com [172.16.24.7])
	by potter.sfbay.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h53Hbu022429;
	Tue, 3 Jun 2003 10:37:56 -0700
Received: (from rth@localhost)
	by dot.sfbay.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) id h53Ha0s19513;
	Tue, 3 Jun 2003 10:36:00 -0700
X-Authentication-Warning: dot.sfbay.redhat.com: rth set sender to rth@redhat.com using -f
Date: Tue, 03 Jun 2003 17:38:00 -0000
From: Richard Henderson <rth@redhat.com>
To: Jim Blandy <jimb@redhat.com>
Cc: Andrew Cagney <ac131313@redhat.com>, Mark Kettenis <kettenis@chello.nl>,
   mludvig@suse.cz, gdb@sources.redhat.com,
   Alexandre Oliva <aoliva@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: dwarf-frame.c question
Message-ID: <20030603173600.GI19452@redhat.com>
References: <200305291544.h4TFi7aL031832@elgar.kettenis.dyndns.org> <3ED66564.1020506@redhat.com> <200305292222.h4TMMmGm000694@elgar.kettenis.dyndns.org> <3ED693F5.9040108@redhat.com> <vt2ptm09nz9.fsf@zenia.red-bean.com> <3ED7BFD1.7060902@redhat.com> <vt2y90kowlv.fsf@zenia.red-bean.com> <20030603054552.GD19075@redhat.com> <vt2fzmrpt9b.fsf@zenia.red-bean.com> <20030603155646.GA19391@redhat.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20030603155646.GA19391@redhat.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i
X-SW-Source: 2003-06/txt/msg00033.txt.bz2

On Tue, Jun 03, 2003 at 08:56:46AM -0700, Richard Henderson wrote:
> Does this have any other adverse side effects though?

Actually, I can think of one -- this would break the existing
jiggery-pokery that happens during exception handling.

The __cxa_throw routine is known to be noreturn.  If we changed
the return address at which it unwound, this would render all
existing EH information invalid, since the throw may not be 
"inside" the region that is expecting calls that can throw.

Sorry.


r~