This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [RFC] C++ vs forced unwinding
- From: "Ulrich Weigand" <Ulrich dot Weigand at de dot ibm dot com>
- To: Richard Henderson <rth at twiddle dot net>
- Cc: bkoz at redhat dot com, gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Wed, 2 Apr 2003 20:47:22 +0200
- Subject: Re: [RFC] C++ vs forced unwinding
- Sensitivity:
Richard Henderson wrote:
>> - gcc's __builtin_return_address / __builtin_frame_address should be
>> using unwind tables instead of hardcoded assumptions about just how
>> a frame link is stored
>
>Absolutely not.
Why not? A lot of existing code is using these, and it will break when
stack backchains are switched off.
If the necessary routines are exported from libgcc (which has all the
unwinder stuff anyway), shouldn't it be relatively simply to implement
__builtin_return_address / __builtin_frame_address in terms of calls
to libgcc routines?
>> - glibc's backtrace () likewise
>
>Use this instead.
For new code, certainly.
Mit freundlichen Gruessen / Best Regards
Ulrich Weigand
--
Dr. Ulrich Weigand
Linux for S/390 Design & Development
IBM Deutschland Entwicklung GmbH, Schoenaicher Str. 220, 71032 Boeblingen
Phone: +49-7031/16-3727 --- Email: Ulrich dot Weigand at de dot ibm dot com