This is the mail archive of the gdb@sources.redhat.com mailing list for the GDB project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: frame->unwind->this_base()



However, shouldn't the only thing needing the `virtual frame pointer' / get_frame_base() be the code that needs a virtual base pointer when computing the value of a local variable?


Yes, and that's the only time that we search for the frame base.  But
what difference does it make?

(gdb) info frame


will display the correct value.

At that point we have an offset that we
know is relative to DW_AT_frame_base, but we don't know if it's
relative to what the rest of GDB considers the frame base (since we
never use DW_AT_frame_base to compute the frame base in the first
place; and it's not clear to me that we should be).

Where, apart from `info frame', and variable evaluation, is it correct for GDB to use the frame base?


Andrew



Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]