This is the mail archive of the gdb-patches@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: [PATCH] Fix frame ID comparison problem on s390


Andrew Cagney wrote:

> Symbol table code often returns 0 to indicate a failed lookup (here a 
> search for the function containing pc).  That zero can end up in the 
> frame ID.  Look at calls to get_frame_func / frame_func_unwind (which 
> I've proposed eliminating).
> 
>  From memory architectures that do not implement dummy ID unwind also 
> end up with wild-card IDs (fortunatly the dummy-frame code works around 
> this).
> 
> Broken tramp unwinders often leave the .code address zero (see paragraph 
> #1 for why).

So, what would you recommend to solve the problem of 'wildcard zero pc'
being confused with 'NULL pointer call'?  Is my original back-end hack
OK with or, or do you have another target-independent suggestion?

Thanks,
Ulrich

-- 
  Dr. Ulrich Weigand
  weigand@informatik.uni-erlangen.de


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