This is the mail archive of the gdb-prs@sources.redhat.com 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: gdb/493: linux inf funcall fails


The following reply was made to PR gdb/493; it has been noted by GNATS.

From: Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@mvista.com>
To: "Golubev I. N." <gin@mo.msk.ru>, gdb-gnats@sources.redhat.com
Cc:  
Subject: Re: gdb/493: linux inf funcall fails
Date: Mon, 22 Apr 2002 10:05:02 -0400

 On Mon, Apr 22, 2002 at 01:18:02PM -0000, Golubev I. N. wrote:
 > The following reply was made to PR gdb/493; it has been noted by GNATS.
 > 
 > From: "Golubev I. N." <gin@mo.msk.ru>
 > To: gdb-gnats@sources.redhat.com, gdb-prs@sources.redhat.com
 > Cc:  
 > Subject: Re: gdb/493: linux inf funcall fails
 > Date: Mon, 22 Apr 2002 13:13:23 (GMT)
 > 
 >  Repeating `uname -a' output.
 >  
 >  Linux host 2.2.19-7.1.asp #1 Tue Oct 23 10:14:04 EDT 2001 i686 unknown
 >  
 >  `j*<stack memory location>' causes SIGSEGV in target process,
 >  regardless of code placed in location being jumped to.
 >  
 >  It appears to me that this ASP linux forbids running instructions
 >  located in stack, that is, `(CALL_DUMMY_LOCATION == ON_STACK)' way of
 >  doing things in `hand_function_call' is unsuitable to this system.
 >  However, just
 >  
 >  #define CALL_DUMMY_LOCATION AT_ENTRY_POINT
 >  
 >  is not enough.  It causes the following.
 
 OK, that makes sense.  There are several non-exec stack patches
 floating around for GNU/Linux.  Andrew, you're (much) more familiar
 with call dummies than I am; is there any reason we ever need to use
 ON_STACK?
 
 -- 
 Daniel Jacobowitz                           Carnegie Mellon University
 MontaVista Software                         Debian GNU/Linux Developer


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