Re: [RFA] epilogue unwinder for i386 (reverse 1/2)

[Daniel Jacobowitz <drow at false dot org>]

On Mon, Jul 13, 2009 at 12:30:19PM -0700, Michael Snyder wrote:
> You're right, bad judgement call on my part.
> I'll take it out again until this is resolved.

Thanks.  Or we can just fix the test, since it sounds straightforward.

> The issue is, the test contains a hand-coded artificial signal
> frame/handler consisting of a single "ret" instruction.
> 
> My new epilogue unwinder recognizes the "ret", so it lays
> claim to the frame before the dwarf unwinder has a chance.
> 
> It still does a proper backtrace, but of course it doesn't
> show the <signal handler> tag, it just shows the function name.
> 
> What do you think?  Could we maybe add a nop here or something?
> I don't understand the details well enough to speculate.

That ought to work, with a comment about what it's there for.
Just don't push/pop to change the stack layout.

-- 
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery