This is the mail archive of the gdb-patches@sourceware.org mailing list for the GDB project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: [unavailable regs/locals, 0/11] Introduction


> From: Pedro Alves <pedro@codesourcery.com>
> Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2011 13:37:58 +0000
> 
> On Tuesday 22 February 2011 13:27:22, Pedro Alves wrote:
> > Tested on x86_64-linux, native and gdbserver.  No
> > regressions, and the new tests pass cleanly.
> 
> ... and it goes without saying:
> 
> I'd appreciate comments and extra eyeballs on all of this.
> Pending objections, I'd like to commit after a reasonable wait.

Pedro, I haven't looked very closely at the code yet, but I have a few
worries.  The GCC debug information tends to underspecify the saved
registers in the unwind info.  The unwinder code deals with
"unspecified"[1] registers by assuming they have the same value as in the
"inner" frame.  How does your new code treat such "unspecified"
registers?

[1] "unspecified" is different from "undefined"


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]