This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: [rfc] frame->frame => frame->addr && frame->base()
- From: Andrew Cagney <ac131313 at cygnus dot com>
- To: Richard dot Earnshaw at arm dot com
- Cc: Kevin Buettner <kevinb at redhat dot com>, gdb at sources dot redhat dot com
- Date: Fri, 12 Apr 2002 10:05:08 -0400
- Subject: Re: [rfc] frame->frame => frame->addr && frame->base()
- References: <200204121253.NAA03207@cam-mail2.cambridge.arm.com>
> Rather than worrying in detail about what should be held in the "frame"
> structure, shouldn't we be more concerned with the methods that need to
> access the frame? Once we have that, what needs to be stored should
> become obvious.
I'm not too worried by the methods used to access a frame (once
created). I'm trying to focus in on just the frame creation phase. In
theory, the code should look like:
create_frame (frame_addr, frame_pc /*I'm loosing that one :-)*/,
The reality - get_prev_frame() - is unfortunatly, very very different.
To appreciate ``the quality'' of the current situtation, grep for '->pc
= ' and '->frame = ' in the tdep.c code, and look at how SP_REGNUM is
special cased in frame->saved_regs.
Still, I've had some success. The code I've got is starting to look
like the above while still keeping the existing code working - even has
a cache :-)