This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: stack-protector guard location
- From: Tom Tromey <tromey at redhat dot com>
- To: Roland McGrath <roland at redhat dot com>
- Cc: Richard Henderson <rth at redhat dot com>, GCC Patches <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: Fri, 28 Aug 2009 09:29:42 -0600
- Subject: Re: stack-protector guard location
- References: <20090827225535.CF70E4050F@magilla.sf.frob.com> <4A971CE3.2060404@redhat.com> <20090828001251.1FC4645B02@magilla.sf.frob.com>
- Reply-to: tromey at redhat dot com
>>>>> "Roland" == Roland McGrath <roland@redhat.com> writes:
Roland> Giving it this name does mean you can suddenly make use of it
Roland> without any new debugger support.
Users will still need a name for it to refer to it from the debugger.
Roland> I think I'd rather go with no name. Also, I think someone should try it
Roland> and verify whether the fake variable DIE confuses GDB at all before we
Roland> firmly decide what to emit.
>From what I can see, GDB ignores variables with no name.
I don't anticipate any problems from either of these approaches, but I
agree, trying it out first would be good.
Tom