This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the GDB project.
[cagney_lazyid-20030317-branch] Try lazy frame ID evaluation
- From: Andrew Cagney <ac131313 at redhat dot com>
- To: gdb-patches at sources dot redhat dot com
- Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2003 10:17:52 -0500
- Subject: [cagney_lazyid-20030317-branch] Try lazy frame ID evaluation
Hello,
I've created the branch cagney_lazyid-20030317-branch and comitted the
attached. It implements the proposal to evaluate the frame's ID in a
lazy fashion. Don't know if it works yet ...
I'm going to also try out the WFI changes (replace pc_in_call_dummy and
pc_in_sigtramp, with get_frame_type (get_current_frame()) to see if the
theory is matched by reality.
Andrew
2003-03-17 Andrew Cagney <cagney at redhat dot com>
* frame.c (get_frame_id): If the frame's ID isn't valid, get it.
(get_prev_frame): Validate THIS frame's ID before trying to unwind
to prev frame. Don't compute PREV's frame's ID.
(get_frame_base): Force the update of frame ID before returning
the frame.
* frame.h (struct frame_info): Add "id_p".
Index: frame.c
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvs/src/src/gdb/frame.c,v
retrieving revision 1.87
diff -u -r1.87 frame.c
--- frame.c 17 Mar 2003 14:23:49 -0000 1.87
+++ frame.c 17 Mar 2003 15:12:10 -0000
@@ -53,17 +53,50 @@
struct frame_id
get_frame_id (struct frame_info *fi)
{
+ struct frame_id id;
if (fi == NULL)
{
+ /* Should never happen! */
return null_frame_id;
}
- else
+ if (!fi->id_p)
{
- struct frame_id id;
- id.base = fi->frame;
- id.pc = fi->pc;
- return id;
+ gdb_assert (!legacy_frame_p (current_gdbarch));
+
+ /* Find THIS frame's ID. */
+ fi->unwind->this_id (fi->next, &fi->prologue_cache, &fi->id);
+ fi->id_p = 1;
+
+ /* Check that the unwound ID is valid. */
+ if (!frame_id_p (fi->id) && frame_debug)
+ fprintf_unfiltered (gdb_stdlog,
+ "Unwound frame ID invalid\n");
+
+ /* Check that the new frame isn't inner to (younger, below, next)
+ the old frame. If that happens the frame unwind is going
+ backwards. */
+ /* FIXME: cagney/2003-02-25: Ignore the sentinel frame since
+ that doesn't have a valid frame ID. Should instead set the
+ sentinel frame's frame ID to a true `sentinel'. Leave it
+ until after the switch to storing the frame ID, instead of
+ the frame base, in the frame object. */
+ if (fi->level >= 0 && frame_id_p (fi->id) && fi->next->id_p
+ && frame_id_inner (fi->id, get_frame_id (fi->next)))
+ error ("Unwound frame inner-to selected frame (corrupt stack?)");
+
+ /* Note that, due to frameless functions, the stronger test of
+ the new frame being outer to the old frame can't be used -
+ frameless functions differ by only their PC value. */
+
+ /* FIXME: cagney/2002-12-18: Instead of this hack, should only
+ store the frame ID in PREV_FRAME. Unfortunatly, some
+ architectures (HP/UX) still reply on EXTRA_FRAME_INFO and,
+ hence, still poke at the "struct frame_info" object directly. */
+ fi->frame = fi->id.base;
}
+ id.base = fi->frame;
+ id.pc = fi->pc;
+ return id;
}
const struct frame_id null_frame_id; /* All zeros. */
@@ -1452,6 +1485,39 @@
return NULL;
}
+ /* If THIS frame ended up with a NULL frame ID, don't bother trying
+ to unwind it. */
+ if (this_frame->level >= 0 && !frame_id_p (get_frame_id (this_frame)))
+ {
+ if (frame_debug)
+ fprintf_filtered (gdb_stdlog,
+ "Outermost frame - next ID is NULL\n");
+ return NULL;
+ }
+
+ /* Check that THIS frame isn't inner to (younger, below, next) the
+ NEXT frame. If that happens the frame unwind went backwards. */
+ /* FIXME: cagney/2003-02-25: Instead of ignoring the sentinel frame
+ (since that doesn't have a valid frame ID), the code should set
+ the sentinel frame's frame ID to a true `sentinel'. Leave it
+ until after the switch to storing the frame ID, instead of the
+ frame base, in the frame object. */
+ if (this_frame->level > 0
+ && frame_id_inner (get_frame_id (this_frame),
+ get_frame_id (this_frame->next)))
+ error ("This frame inner-to next frame (corrupt stack?)");
+
+ /* Check that THIS and NEXT frame are different. If they are not,
+ there is most likely a stack cycle. */
+ /* FIXME: cagney/2003-03-17: Can't yet do this check. The
+ frame_id_eq() method doesn't yet use function addresses when
+ comparing IDs. */
+ if (0
+ && this_frame->level > 0
+ && frame_id_eq (get_frame_id (this_frame),
+ get_frame_id (this_frame->next)))
+ error ("This frame identical to next frame (corrupt stack?)");
+
/* If any of the old frame initialization methods are around, use
the legacy get_prev_frame method. */
if (legacy_frame_p (current_gdbarch))
@@ -1509,63 +1575,7 @@
prev_frame->unwind = frame_unwind_find_by_pc (current_gdbarch,
prev_frame->pc);
- /* Find the prev's frame's ID. */
-
- /* The callee expects to be invoked with:
-
- this->unwind->this_id (this->next, &this->cache, &this->id);
-
- The below is carefully shifted one frame `to the left' so that
- both the unwind->this_id and unwind->prev_register methods are
- consistently invoked with NEXT_FRAME and THIS_PROLOGUE_CACHE.
-
- Also note that, while the PC for this new previous frame was
- unwound first (see above), the below is the first call that
- [potentially] requires analysis of the new previous frame's
- prologue. Consequently, it is this call, that typically ends up
- initializing the previous frame's prologue cache. */
- prev_frame->unwind->this_id (this_frame,
- &prev_frame->prologue_cache,
- &prev_frame->id);
-
- /* Check that the unwound ID is valid. */
- if (!frame_id_p (prev_frame->id))
- {
- if (frame_debug)
- fprintf_unfiltered (gdb_stdlog,
- "Outermost frame - unwound frame ID invalid\n");
- return NULL;
- }
-
- /* Check that the new frame isn't inner to (younger, below, next)
- the old frame. If that happens the frame unwind is going
- backwards. */
- /* FIXME: cagney/2003-02-25: Ignore the sentinel frame since that
- doesn't have a valid frame ID. Should instead set the sentinel
- frame's frame ID to a true `sentinel'. Leave it until after the
- switch to storing the frame ID, instead of the frame base, in the
- frame object. */
- if (this_frame->level >= 0
- && frame_id_inner (prev_frame->id, get_frame_id (this_frame)))
- error ("Unwound frame inner-to selected frame (corrupt stack?)");
-
- /* FIXME: cagney/2003-03-14: Should check that this and next frame's
- IDs are different (i.e., !frame_id_eq()). Can't yet do that as
- the EQ function doesn't yet compare PC values. */
-
- /* FIXME: cagney/2003-03-14: Should delay the evaluation of the
- frame ID until when it is needed. That way the inner most frame
- can be created without needing to do prologue analysis. */
-
- /* Note that, due to frameless functions, the stronger test of the
- new frame being outer to the old frame can't be used - frameless
- functions differ by only their PC value. */
-
- /* FIXME: cagney/2002-12-18: Instead of this hack, should only store
- the frame ID in PREV_FRAME. Unfortunatly, some architectures
- (HP/UX) still reply on EXTRA_FRAME_INFO and, hence, still poke at
- the "struct frame_info" object directly. */
- prev_frame->frame = prev_frame->id.base;
+ /* The PREV's frame ID is computed on-demand in get_frame_id(). */
/* Link it in. */
this_frame->prev = prev_frame;
@@ -1608,6 +1618,12 @@
CORE_ADDR
get_frame_base (struct frame_info *fi)
{
+ if (!fi->id_p)
+ {
+ /* Force the ID code to (indirectly) initialize the ->frame
+ pointer. */
+ get_frame_id (fi);
+ }
return fi->frame;
}
Index: frame.h
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvs/src/src/gdb/frame.h,v
retrieving revision 1.75
diff -u -r1.75 frame.h
--- frame.h 17 Mar 2003 14:23:49 -0000 1.75
+++ frame.h 17 Mar 2003 15:12:11 -0000
@@ -410,8 +410,10 @@
CORE_ADDR pc_unwind_cache;
/* This frame's ID. Note that the frame's ID, base and PC contain
- redundant information. */
+ redundant information. If id_p is non-zero, the ID is assumed
+ to be valid. */
struct frame_id id;
+ int id_p;
/* Pointers to the next (down, inner, younger) and previous (up,
outer, older) frame_info's in the frame cache. */