This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: getunwind syscall
- From: David Mosberger <davidm at napali dot hpl dot hp dot com>
- To: Daniel Jacobowitz <drow at mvista dot com>
- Cc: "J. Johnston" <jjohnstn at redhat dot com>,gdb-patches at sources dot redhat dot com, Andrew Cagney <ac131313 at redhat dot com>,kevinb at redhat dot com, davidm at hpl dot hp dot com
- Date: Fri, 31 Oct 2003 14:49:13 -0800
- Subject: Re: getunwind syscall
- References: <3FA2B7CA.5070200@redhat.com><20031031200126.GA6723@nevyn.them.org>
- Reply-to: davidm at hpl dot hp dot com
>>>>> On Fri, 31 Oct 2003 15:01:26 -0500, Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@mvista.com> said:
Daniel> On Fri, Oct 31, 2003 at 02:28:10PM -0500, J. Johnston wrote:
>> More info from David.
Daniel> So the getunwind syscall returns data from the gate DSO?
Almost. It returns the equivalent data as contained in the unwind
tables of the gate DSO. The data itself isn't quite identical, but it
serves the same purpose, yese.
Daniel> I was under the impression it was some register backing
Daniel> store, or similar.
Nope.
Daniel> In that case Roland's patches for the same issue on x86
Daniel> should be persued instead of using the syscall.
Longer-term, certainly. But in the medium term (I'd say for the next
1-2 years at least), we need the syscall support for the many (older)
kernels that are out there already. Only 2.6-based kernels will have
the DSO.
--david