From: Andrew Cagney <ac131313@redhat.com>
To: Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@mvista.com>
Cc: gdb@sources.redhat.com
Subject: Re: frame->unwind->this_base()
Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2003 15:22:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <3E773325.8090001@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20030318051348.GA19741@nevyn.them.org>
>
> So in this case should we be hooking the get_frame_base() call to
> return the computed DW_AT_frame_base? [...] And what happens if we don't have DWARF-2
> information?
At the start I wrote:
> For dwarf2 frames, it would return, DW_AT_frame_base. For prologue
frames, it would return an attempt at an equivalent value. Hopefully it
wouldn't be called for other frame types :-).
A better question is, what about other debug types? The definition of
the frame-base is dependant on the debug info.
Dig dig. Other debug info (e.g., LOC_LOCAL) depends on
FRAME_LOCALS_ADDRESS(). So to take this a step further, it is a merged
FRAME_LOCALS_ADDRESS() + get_frame_base() that is needs to become per frame.
> If so, we're going to need to go
> through all the uses and computations of the frame base in all targets
> for consistency.
All existing calls to get_frame_base() in core-gdb need to be audited
anyway :-( This is so that breakage such as VALUE_FRAME() can finally
be laid to rest (see "frame.h", "frame ID" for why get_frame_base()
isn't up to the task).
Andrew
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2003-03-18 15:22 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2003-03-16 22:04 frame->unwind->this_base() Andrew Cagney
2003-03-16 22:10 ` frame->unwind->this_base() Daniel Jacobowitz
2003-03-17 0:09 ` frame->unwind->this_base() Andrew Cagney
2003-03-17 0:14 ` frame->unwind->this_base() Daniel Jacobowitz
2003-03-17 16:22 ` frame->unwind->this_base() Andrew Cagney
2003-03-17 16:38 ` frame->unwind->this_base() Daniel Jacobowitz
2003-03-17 16:56 ` frame->unwind->this_base() Andrew Cagney
2003-03-17 17:11 ` frame->unwind->this_base() Daniel Jacobowitz
2003-03-17 18:20 ` frame->unwind->this_base() Andrew Cagney
2003-03-17 19:35 ` frame->unwind->this_base() Daniel Jacobowitz
2003-03-18 4:29 ` frame->unwind->this_base() Andrew Cagney
2003-03-18 5:13 ` frame->unwind->this_base() Daniel Jacobowitz
2003-03-18 15:22 ` Andrew Cagney [this message]
2003-03-18 16:38 ` frame->unwind->this_base() Daniel Jacobowitz
2003-03-18 17:02 ` frame->unwind->this_base() Andrew Cagney
2003-03-18 17:11 ` frame->unwind->this_base() Daniel Jacobowitz
2003-03-18 17:28 ` frame->unwind->this_base() Andrew Cagney
2003-03-18 17:38 ` frame->unwind->this_base() Daniel Jacobowitz
2003-03-18 20:22 ` frame->unwind->this_base() Andrew Cagney
2003-03-19 14:11 ` frame->unwind->this_base() Daniel Jacobowitz
2003-03-19 15:24 ` frame->unwind->this_base() Andrew Cagney
2003-03-19 15:32 ` frame->unwind->this_base() Daniel Jacobowitz
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=3E773325.8090001@redhat.com \
--to=ac131313@redhat.com \
--cc=drow@mvista.com \
--cc=gdb@sources.redhat.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
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).