This is the mail archive of the binutils@sources.redhat.com mailing list for the binutils 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] |
>>> "H. J. Lu" <hjl@lucon.org> 06.05.05 17:33:26 >>> >On Fri, May 06, 2005 at 05:05:48PM +0200, Jan Beulich wrote: >> >>> "H. J. Lu" <hjl@lucon.org> 06.05.05 16:00:38 >>> >> >On Fri, May 06, 2005 at 02:01:21PM +0200, Jan Beulich wrote: >> >> The register numbers used in x86-64's .eh_frame entries neither matched the >> >> ABI nor the gcc implementation. Additionally, a significant amount of >> >> registers were missing in both 32- and 64-bit modes (even now there are, but >> >> only those for which there don't appear to be register numbers assigned in >> >> the respective ABI). >> >> >> > >> >Have we been generating wrong unwind info up to now? >> >> Yes, it looks like that. > >How has it ever worked with glibc and gdb? Because the CFI directives are rarely used, and (as Daniel pointed out) only some registers were mis-numbered. Jan
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |