s/contractor/constructor/
> On Oct 10, 2014, at 1:20 PM, Greg Clayton <gclay...@apple.com> wrote: > > >> On Oct 10, 2014, at 1:05 PM, Philippe Lavoie <philippe.lav...@octasic.com> >> wrote: >> >> Hi, >> >> I noticed that by default lldb does not read .debug_frame section to unwind >> frames but relies instead on .eh_frame . >> >> Is there a way to fallback to reading .debug_frame? > > Not currently. Most compilers (gcc _and_ clang) put the same old stuff in > .debug_frame as they do in .eh_frame, so we haven't had to use .debug_frame > over .eh_frame yet. What compiler are using that is putting different (more > complete) info in .debug_frame vs .eh_frame? > >> >> I tried getting DWARFCallFrameInfo to read a .debug_frame section, but it >> fails interpreting the CIE_id field. It assumes that it is a CIE Pointer. > > There is a boolean you have to set to true or false in the contractor: > > > DWARFCallFrameInfo (ObjectFile& objfile, > lldb::SectionSP& section, > lldb::RegisterKind reg_kind, > bool is_eh_frame); > > Set "is_eh_frame" to false if you are using DWARF and the errors below will > disappear. > >> error: unable to find CIE at 0x00000014 for cie_id = 0x000000c8 for entry at >> 0x000000d8. >> error: unable to find CIE at 0x0000004c for cie_id = 0x000000c8 for entry at >> 0x00000110. >> error: unable to find CIE at 0x00000068 for cie_id = 0x000000c8 for entry at >> 0x0000012c. >> >> Thanks, >> -Philippe >> _______________________________________________ >> lldb-dev mailing list >> lldb-dev@cs.uiuc.edu >> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/lldb-dev > _______________________________________________ lldb-dev mailing list lldb-dev@cs.uiuc.edu http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/lldb-dev
