From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 9855 invoked by alias); 18 Mar 2003 15:22:05 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 9785 invoked from network); 18 Mar 2003 15:22:05 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO localhost.redhat.com) (207.219.125.105) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 18 Mar 2003 15:22:05 -0000 Received: from redhat.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C3F7A2B11; Tue, 18 Mar 2003 09:54:29 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <3E773325.8090001@redhat.com> Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2003 15:22:00 -0000 From: Andrew Cagney User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; NetBSD macppc; en-US; rv:1.0.2) Gecko/20030223 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Daniel Jacobowitz Cc: gdb@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: frame->unwind->this_base() References: <20030316221008.GA19037@nevyn.them.org> <3E75121F.4030405@redhat.com> <20030317001407.GA20827@nevyn.them.org> <3E75F64B.5040700@redhat.com> <20030317163843.GA11494@nevyn.them.org> <3E75FE48.9000104@redhat.com> <20030317171142.GA15367@nevyn.them.org> <3E7611EC.3020304@redhat.com> <20030317193537.GA11288@nevyn.them.org> <3E7670F6.9060906@redhat.com> <20030318051348.GA19741@nevyn.them.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2003-03/txt/msg00274.txt.bz2 > > 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