From: Florian Weimer <fweimer@redhat.com>
To: Michael Matz <matz@suse.de>, Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com>
Cc: Jeff Law <law@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: <c7b4990b-aef6-60fc-30a1-6198b012b7d0@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LSU.2.21.1807021803020.15410@wotan.suse.de>
On 07/02/2018 06:14 PM, Michael Matz wrote:
> There is no such language in the psABI, no (at least I haven't found
> anything; you had me worried for a moment :) ). But there's stronger one:
> all functions through which unwinding is expected must provide CFI. So,
> yes, such code isn't strictly conforming. But there we are, there's much
> code that isn't and we still have to sensibly deal with it (if we can).
> IMHO making guesses is better than to stop unwinding. And IMHO guessing
> that it's FP-using is better than guessing that it's leaf, especially if
> the PC in question was the result of a prior unwinding step (making it
> clear that it certainly was_not_ leaf).
Well, the previous frame could have been a signal handler frame, but I
see your point.
Anyway, I've proposed a BoF for these topics for the next Cauldron.
Thanks,
Florian
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-07-05 19:31 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 ` Michael Matz
2018-01-01 0:00 ` Jakub Jelinek
2018-01-01 0:00 ` Michael Matz
2018-01-01 0:00 ` Florian Weimer [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 ` Nathan Sidwell
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
2018-01-01 0:00 ` Jakub Jelinek
2018-01-01 0:00 ` Florian Weimer
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=c7b4990b-aef6-60fc-30a1-6198b012b7d0@redhat.com \
--to=fweimer@redhat.com \
--cc=binutils@sourceware.org \
--cc=gcc@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=gnu-gabi@sourceware.org \
--cc=jakub@redhat.com \
--cc=law@redhat.com \
--cc=libc-alpha@sourceware.org \
--cc=matz@suse.de \
/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).