From: Mark Kettenis <kettenis@chello.nl>
To: Richard Henderson <rth@redhat.com>
Cc: gdb@sources.redhat.com
Subject: Re: dwarf-frame.c question
Date: Sun, 01 Jun 2003 10:00:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <86brxice2j.fsf@elgar.kettenis.dyndns.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: Richard Henderson's message of "Sat, 31 May 2003 22:57:51 -0700"
Richard Henderson <rth@redhat.com> writes:
> [ Pasted from web archives, sorry. ]
>
> Mark Kettenis:
> > Andrew, it seems that we should tweak the frame code
> > to make sure that frame_unwind_by_pc is always passed a PC *within* the
> > function.
>
> Andrew Cagney:
> > True, but how? It would effectively be frame_unwind_address_in_block() but
> > how reliably/where could it be used?
>
> Careful; this silliness of subtracting one is not universal.
>
> ABI's with more thought in them (e.g. IA64) require the compiler
> to put *something* after a noreturn call that ends a function.
> This being a relatively uncommon case, it does not add much code
> size, and it solves some of the ambiguity problems you're seeing.
Note that it is not only noreturn calls that end a function that pose
a problem. As Andrew and Alexandre pointed out, branch instructions
pose a problem too.
Do you think we should require (or politely ask ;-)) the compiler to
put something after a noreturn call on other targets as well?
Mark
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2003-06-01 10:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2003-06-01 5:59 Richard Henderson
2003-06-01 10:00 ` Mark Kettenis [this message]
2003-06-02 20:34 ` Richard Henderson
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2003-05-27 15:19 Michal Ludvig
2003-05-29 15:44 ` Mark Kettenis
2003-05-29 19:54 ` Andrew Cagney
2003-05-29 22:22 ` Mark Kettenis
2003-05-29 22:43 ` Michal Ludvig
2003-05-29 23:13 ` Andrew Cagney
2003-05-30 1:34 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2003-05-30 20:21 ` Jim Blandy
2003-05-30 20:21 ` Jim Blandy
2003-05-30 20:32 ` Andrew Cagney
2003-06-03 0:04 ` Jim Blandy
2003-06-03 5:47 ` Richard Henderson
2003-06-03 6:32 ` Jim Blandy
2003-06-03 15:58 ` Richard Henderson
2003-06-03 17:38 ` Richard Henderson
2003-06-03 20:12 ` Alexandre Oliva
2003-05-30 20:44 ` Alexandre Oliva
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=86brxice2j.fsf@elgar.kettenis.dyndns.org \
--to=kettenis@chello.nl \
--cc=gdb@sources.redhat.com \
--cc=rth@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).