This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sourceware.org
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: [rfc, frame] Add backtrace stop reasons
On Tue, Aug 22, 2006 at 10:09:31PM +0200, Mark Kettenis wrote:
> But you're cheating by choosing an example from a register-starved
> architecture ;-) Here's the output on 64-bit SPARC:
Well yeah :-)
> It's not yet a screenful, but already getting close. I think I've
> seen even worse on 64-bit MIPS, but indeed it is not too bad yet.
I doubt it; SPARC64 tends to have more saved registers, because of the
large windows, than MIPS. I wonder how bad IA64 is though!
> But I guess I'd really wanted to point out that we should be careful
> about printing out too much information. On the other hand we would
> only print the additionol info for the last frame on the chain. It's
> my feeling though that "Stops backtrace" does not indicate a property
> of the frame like the other things we print. But printing something
> like "Outermost frame: unwinding indicated no return address". sounds
> better to me.
Ooh, that's a good point. I've changed the message in my copies of the
patch; I like yours much better!
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery