This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GDB project.
[RFC] Use of create_new_frame from 'frame'.
- From: Andrew Burgess <andrew dot burgess at embecosm dot com>
- To: gdb-patches at sourceware dot org
- Date: Wed, 8 Jul 2015 18:09:44 +0100
- Subject: [RFC] Use of create_new_frame from 'frame'.
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
The 'frame' command can cause 'create_new_frame' in some conditions:
- When two arguments are passed, or
- When one argument is passed that is not:
- A valid index into the backtrace, or
- A valid stack frame base address.
Personally, I dislike this behaviour because:
1. It's easy to make a mistake using the frame command and create a
new frame. It's not obvious (I think) how to recover from this
situation. [ The answer is just to use 'frame' again with a
valid frame specifier argument. ]
2. As a backtrace can be possibly any depth then depending on where
we stop alters which frames we can create. This seems a little
We could improve #1 by not allowing small indexes that are close to
the number of frames in the backtrace, however, this feels like a bit
of a hack, and would be a little annoying on small targets where low
value addresses are actually valid.
I wonder then if there's a better way to offer this feature. The two
possible choices (other suggestions welcome) are:
1. Create a new command 'create-frame' that takes one or two
arguments, and always creates and selects a new frame new frame.
The frame command no longer creates new frames.
2. Make 'frame' take an (optional) flag (like 'x', or
'disassemble'), so a user can now say:
frame /c STACK-ADDR PC-ADDR
in order to create (and select) a new frame. Without the /c flag
no new frames are created. With the flag only new frames are
created, old frames are not selected.
What do people think? Any alternative suggestions?