Hi!
When GDB and LLDB perform virtual unwinding, they subtract one byte
from the return addresses of the outer frames. This is for example
necessary when unwinding from a non-returning call that is placed last
in the function, as the return address then can point to a different
function. I assume
On tor, 2018-12-06 at 16:32 +0100, Andreas Arnez via Dwarf-Discuss
wrote:
> If GDB uses caller-saved register values from the inner-most frame in
> outer frames, then this is a bug. Note that this could also be
> caused
> by bad CFI.
Hmm, right. I'm not very familiar with the design philosophy of
On tor, 2018-12-06 at 17:47 -0800, Cary Coutant via Dwarf-Discuss
wrote:
> But we're getting sidetracked from the OP's question: Does GCC in
> fact
> subtract one from the upper bound of a location list entry for a
> variable contained in a caller-saved register? I can think of no
> reason why it s
Hi!
This is something that has popped up in a number of LLVM patch reviews,
and is something that we would like to get some help with clarifying.
For DWARF[345], may a DWARF Expression (described in section 2.5)
contain any of the operations listed under the Location Descriptions
section (2.6)? F
Hi!
Is it possible to encode different backtrace information, including
inlining, for two different instructions in a VLIW bundle?
I'll probably use inprecise and non-standard wording below. Sorry if
that is the case.
Assume that the following C program:
foo.h:
static inline void foo_inl_in
On Thu, 2024-10-17 at 12:30 +, John DelSignore wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I think the best way to encode the information depends on details of
> the processor architecture.
Hi John,
Thanks for the reply, and it's interesting to hear about that Itanium
case!
The scheme that you describe below seems
