Re: Fix backtrace for interpreted code

[Andrew Haley <aph at redhat dot com>]

Bryce McKinlay writes:
 > Andrew Haley wrote:
 > 
 > >Anthony Green writes:
 > > > On Thu, 2004-10-14 at 07:48, Andrew Haley wrote:
 > > > > That's right.  The solution I came up with is the only one I know to
 > > > > be correct.
 > > > 
 > > > Does the mingw port support named sections?  If so, we could put the
 > > > special method in its own section and surround it with
 > > > _Jv_StartOfInterpreter, etc in the linker script.
 > >
 > >I suppose so.  I guess this means we'd have to create a customer
 > >linker script for mingw.  I don't object, but I can't do it.
 > >
 > >Surely it's better to fix MD_FALLBACK_FRAME_STATE_FOR to unwind
 > >through SEH frames.  That would bring many benefits.
 > 
 > Indeed. If we want proper stack traces on Windows - particularly
 > ones that are good enough for the security model, this must be
 > done.

There's example code at
http://www.jorgon.freeserve.co.uk/ExceptFrame.htm.  There are more
examples and some patches on the net.  As I see it, we don't need to
provide full SEH support, only to unwind through an SEH frame.  Is
there some specific problem anyone here knows about?

Andrew.