From: Nathan Sidwell <nathan@acm.org>
To: Florian Weimer <fweimer@redhat.com>, GCC <gcc@gcc.gnu.org>,
GNU C Library <libc-alpha@sourceware.org>,
Binutils <binutils@sourceware.org>,
gnu-gabi@sourceware.org
Subject: Re: Invalid program counters and unwinding
Date: Mon, 01 Jan 2018 00:00:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <0b0e49f0-7ed0-aa4e-a4df-d4286206dab5@acm.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <0c58f1bb-220c-d03d-7375-6066fb7d53e6@redhat.com>
On 06/26/2018 07:01 AM, Florian Weimer wrote:
> On 06/26/2018 12:56 PM, Nathan Sidwell wrote:
>> On 06/26/2018 05:26 AM, Florian Weimer wrote:
>>
>>> So it looks to me that the caller of _Unwind_Find_FDE needs to ensure
>>> that the PC is a valid element of the call stack. Is this a correct
>>> assumption?
>>
>> I thought this was an (implicit?) requirement. You're unwinding a
>> stack to deliver an exception up it. Are there use cases where that
>> is not the case?
>
> We have something approaching this scenario.
>
> pthread_cancel in glibc unwinds the stack using DWARF information until
> encounters a frame without unwind information, when it switches to
> longjmp to get past that obstacle.
This is a long jump to the originating pthread function at the end of
the stack, right? We not only get past the obstacle, but any and all
DWARF frames on top of it. (just for my understanding)
> However, at the point of transition from a valid DWARF frame into the
> wilderness (without unwind data), we should still have accurate
> information on the caller's PC, so _Unwind_Find_FDE will reliably fail
> to find any unwind data for it. It's not a random pointer somewhere
> else, so I think even the pthread_cancel case is fully supported.
That sounds right. It's a PC that you could return to if you weren't
trying to unwind the stack.
nathan
--
Nathan Sidwell
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-06-26 11:15 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-01-01 0:00 Florian Weimer
2018-01-01 0:00 ` Jeff Law
2018-01-01 0:00 ` Florian Weimer
2018-01-01 0:00 ` Jeff Law
2018-01-01 0:00 ` Florian Weimer
2018-01-01 0:00 ` Michael Matz
2018-01-01 0:00 ` Jakub Jelinek
2018-01-01 0:00 ` Michael Matz
2018-01-01 0:00 ` Florian Weimer
2018-01-01 0:00 ` Nathan Sidwell
2018-01-01 0:00 ` Florian Weimer
2018-01-01 0:00 ` Jakub Jelinek
2018-01-01 0:00 ` Florian Weimer
2018-01-01 0:00 ` Nathan Sidwell [this message]
2018-01-01 0:00 ` Florian Weimer
2018-01-01 0:00 ` Nathan Sidwell
2018-01-01 0:00 ` Florian Weimer
2018-01-01 0:00 ` Jakub Jelinek
2018-01-01 0:00 ` Nathan Sidwell
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=0b0e49f0-7ed0-aa4e-a4df-d4286206dab5@acm.org \
--to=nathan@acm.org \
--cc=binutils@sourceware.org \
--cc=fweimer@redhat.com \
--cc=gcc@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=gnu-gabi@sourceware.org \
--cc=libc-alpha@sourceware.org \
/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).