On 9 November 2014 17:12, Joerg Sonnenberger jo...@britannica.bec.de wrote:
o .eh_frame in kernel is not used yet, and safely removed from /netbsd
Please do not.
o Is it correct that .eh_frame is not used by anything at all at the moment?
gdb should in principle, haven't tried. libunwind
On Mon, Nov 10, 2014 at 06:06:54PM +, Andrew Cagney wrote:
On 9 November 2014 17:12, Joerg Sonnenberger jo...@britannica.bec.de wrote:
o .eh_frame in kernel is not used yet, and safely removed from /netbsd
Please do not.
o Is it correct that .eh_frame is not used by anything
On 10 November 2014 18:21, Joerg Sonnenberger jo...@britannica.bec.de wrote:
Consider x86_64 where you can't do reliable stack unwinding without also
disabling -fomit-frame-pointer. The question is not about .debug_frame
vs .eh_frame, you don't get the former at all without explicitly asking
hand-written eh-frame code. That shouldn't be a problem as, from gas:
7.11 `.cfi_sections SECTION_LIST'
=
`.cfi_sections' may be used to specify whether CFI directives should
emit `.eh_frame' section and/or `.debug_frame' section. If
SECTION_LIST is `.eh_frame
Do I understand this correctly?
o .eh_frame is GNU extension debug info to unwind stack [1]
o .eh_frame is generated by GCC/LLVM [2]
o Some code under src/sys/ reference it, but not finished hooked to any
kernel functionality (ddb(4)?)
o .eh_frame in kernel is not used yet, and safely removed
On Sun, Nov 09, 2014 at 09:26:45PM +0900, Masao Uebayashi wrote:
o .eh_frame is GNU extension debug info to unwind stack [1]
No.
o .eh_frame is generated by GCC/LLVM [2]
Yes.
o Some code under src/sys/ reference it, but not finished hooked to any
kernel functionality (ddb(4)?)
Yes.
o
On Mon, Nov 10, 2014 at 1:24 AM, Joerg Sonnenberger
jo...@britannica.bec.de wrote:
On Sun, Nov 09, 2014 at 09:26:45PM +0900, Masao Uebayashi wrote:
o .eh_frame is GNU extension debug info to unwind stack [1]
No.
Ian Lance Taylor said that it is similar to DWARF .debug_frame, but different
On Mon, Nov 10, 2014 at 01:40:59AM +0900, Masao Uebayashi wrote:
On Mon, Nov 10, 2014 at 1:24 AM, Joerg Sonnenberger
jo...@britannica.bec.de wrote:
On Sun, Nov 09, 2014 at 09:26:45PM +0900, Masao Uebayashi wrote:
o .eh_frame is GNU extension debug info to unwind stack [1]
No.
Ian
You might find this useful:
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/lldb-dev/2014-October/005546.html
Several notes:
- while eh_frame is meant to be the minimum information needed to
unwind function calls, the desire to unwind through C code and signals
from C++ means that most systems ship
On Mon, Nov 10, 2014 at 4:02 AM, Andrew Cagney andrew.cag...@gmail.com wrote:
You might find this useful:
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/lldb-dev/2014-October/005546.html
Several notes:
- while eh_frame is meant to be the minimum information needed to
unwind function calls, the desire
wrote:
o .eh_frame is GNU extension debug info to unwind stack [1]
No.
Ian Lance Taylor said that it is similar to DWARF .debug_frame, but
different.
Yes, but it is not a GNU extension.
o .eh_frame in kernel is not used yet, and safely removed from /netbsd
Please do not.
o
11 matches
Mail list logo