[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

[schwab@suse.de: Re: [PATCH] Support backtrace () on IA-64, make it work even with -fomit-frame-pointer on AMD64]

Doko & GCC folks,

FYI - This may be a critical patch needed for ia64's glibc.  When doing
some testing with upstream CVS 2 days ago, I noticed the backtrace
failure, and this thread popped up at the same time.

Would you consider applying this patch during the next gcc upload?

If you want to read the whole thread, you can find it here:

I haven't filed a bug because I haven't tested it myself, and I don't
really understand the code that it touches, so am hesitant to assert
that this is exactly the right solution.  (But when schwab and jakub say
it is, it usually is)

Jeff Bailey

----- Forwarded message from Andreas Schwab <schwab@suse.de> -----

Mailing-List: contact libc-hacker-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:libc-hacker-unsubscribe-jbailey=nisa.net@sources.redhat.com>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:libc-hacker-subscribe@sources.redhat.com>
List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/libc-hacker/>
List-Post: <mailto:libc-hacker@sources.redhat.com>
List-Help: <mailto:libc-hacker-help@sources.redhat.com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
To: Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com>
Cc: Glibc hackers <libc-hacker@sources.redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Support backtrace () on IA-64, make it work even with
 -fomit-frame-pointer on AMD64
From: Andreas Schwab <schwab@suse.de>
X-Yow: Dizzy, are we "REAL PEOPLE" or "AMAZING ANIMALS"?
X-EMSscan-MailScanner: Found to be clean
X-EMSscan-MailScanner-SpamCheck: not spam, SpamAssassin (score=-9.469,
	required 5, AWL -4.57, BAYES_00 -4.90)

Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com> writes:

> On Thu, Oct 09, 2003 at 04:04:42PM +0200, Andreas Schwab wrote:
>> Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com> writes:
>> > On Thu, Oct 09, 2003 at 02:47:53PM +0200, Andreas Schwab wrote:
>> >> Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com> writes:
>> >> 
>> >> > Sorry, I only compiled it outside of glibc and there it worked.
>> >> > Here is a better patch (built on amd64, passed make check, checked output
>> >> > of a few sample proglets):
>> >> 
>> >> Doesn't seem to work on ia64, though.
>> >
>> > Works for me just fine (gcc-3_3-rhl-branch libgcc_s.so.1),
>> > with various CFLAGS used for backtrace-tst (-O2, -O0, with or without
>> > -Wl,--export-dynamic, etc.).
>> > What kind of libgcc you're using?
>> Just the one that comes with gcc 3.3.1.
> Diffing gcc-3_3{,-rhl}-branch, I think just
> 2003-05-16  Jakub Jelinek  <jakub@redhat.com>
>         * config/ia64/unwind-ia64.c (uw_update_reg_address): Handle
>         .save XX, r0.
> might be the difference which matters.

Thanks, that did it.


Andreas Schwab, SuSE Labs, schwab@suse.de
SuSE Linux AG, Deutschherrnstr. 15-19, D-90429 Nürnberg
Key fingerprint = 58CA 54C7 6D53 942B 1756  01D3 44D5 214B 8276 4ED5
"And now for something completely different."

----- End forwarded message -----

Reply to: