On Thu, Jul 17, 2025 at 02:07:05PM +0200, Jens Remus wrote: > On 17.07.2025 04:50, Josh Poimboeuf wrote: > > So the following is wrong: > > > > case UNWIND_USER_LOC_STACK: > > if (!frame->fp.frame_off) > > goto done; > > if (unwind_get_user_long(fp, cfa + frame->fp.frame_off, state)) > > goto done; > > break; > > > > Instead of having !fp.frame_off stopping the unwind, it should just > > break out of the switch statement and keep going. > > If frame->fp.loc is UNWIND_USER_LOC_STACK then frame->fp.frame_off must > have a value != 0. At least if we keep the original semantic. > > We can omit this check, if we assume all producers of frame behave > correctly. For instance user unwind sframe would not produce that > (see below). Could it somehow be made a debug-config-only check?
Ah... the !frame->fp.frame_off check for the UNWIND_USER_LOC_STACK case completely threw me for a loop. I was confusing that with UNWIND_USER_LOC_NONE. So never mind. And yes, I think that check has no use and can be removed. -- Josh
