> I dropped the arm32 frame pointer unwinder for now (maybe we need a less
> demanding testcase for that or, more awesome, add code to translate the
> exidx section for that).
Another problem is that QV4-generated code on a new frame pushes LR first and
then FP. Code generated by gcc with "-arm -
On Thu, 2017-04-20 at 11:26 +0200, Ulf Hermann wrote:
> The x86_64 case already works with the test case I sent. Maybe we can
> accept that one before the others. The aarch64 case almost works, but
> seems to generally duplicate the first entry it unwinds by frame
> pointer after unwinding anything
> That might just mean that the testcase is slightly unrealistic.
> Getting a reliable backtrace through signal handlers when not having
> full CFI is probably not something we can expect to work. That doesn't
> mean having a frame pointer based fallback is a bad thing. We probably
> should find a
On Tue, 2017-04-11 at 12:16 +0200, Ulf Hermann wrote:
> > I do agree with Jan that frame pointer unwinding is notoriously
> > untrustworthy. Even with some sanity checks it is hard to know whether
> > you are doing a correct unwind. gdb gets away with it through pretty
> > advanced frame sniffers,
> I do agree with Jan that frame pointer unwinding is notoriously
> untrustworthy. Even with some sanity checks it is hard to know whether
> you are doing a correct unwind. gdb gets away with it through pretty
> advanced frame sniffers, which take a lot of low-level compiler
> generation knowledge
On Mon, 2017-04-03 at 23:15 +0200, Mark Wielaard wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 03, 2017 at 11:02:53AM +0200, Ulf Hermann wrote:
> > > Ping? Any progress on merging this functionality upstream?
> > > It can make quite a difference in unwinding.
> >
> > The patches have also been in perfparser releases for o
- In the example above, the address points into libnvidia-glcore.so and as
such not compiled by my colleague but rather provided by NVidia as a binary
blob. When you only got a binary blob and have to make do with it, you cannot
tell people to "just fix the compiler invocation".
This is their pr
On Tue, 04 Apr 2017 09:40:06 +0200, Milian Wolff wrote:
> - In the example above, the address points into libnvidia-glcore.so and as
> such not compiled by my colleague but rather provided by NVidia as a binary
> blob. When you only got a binary blob and have to make do with it, you cannot
> tel
On Monday, April 3, 2017 11:23:25 PM CEST Jan Kratochvil wrote:
> On Mon, 03 Apr 2017 11:00:03 +0200, Milian Wolff wrote:
> > I just got a report from a colleague. As-is, elfutils would fail to unwind
> > from the following location in his application:
> >
> > 0x1137ca4
>
> > With the x86_64 patc
On Mon, 03 Apr 2017 11:00:03 +0200, Milian Wolff wrote:
> I just got a report from a colleague. As-is, elfutils would fail to unwind
> from the following location in his application:
>
> 0x1137ca4
>
> With the x86_64 patch applied, he got a proper backtrace:
S/he has something wrong with the co
On Mon, Apr 03, 2017 at 11:02:53AM +0200, Ulf Hermann wrote:
> > Ping? Any progress on merging this functionality upstream?
> > It can make quite a difference in unwinding.
>
> The patches have also been in perfparser releases for over a year now. I
> would like to see them upstream.
Yes, sorry.
Ping? Any progress on merging this functionality upstream? It can make quite a
difference in unwinding.
The patches have also been in perfparser releases for over a year now. I
would like to see them upstream.
best,
Ulf
On Thursday, February 16, 2017 12:33:27 AM CEST Mark Wielaard wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I put all three frame pointer unwinding fallback patches on
> the mjw/fp-unwind branch. I'll also sent them to the list using
> git send-mail --annotate taking out the binary file patches.
> Hopefully that will make the
> I had to hand apply a few things because of whitespace adjustments.
> Hopefully I did it right and this is how Ulf intended the patches.
> If not, my apologies, and please let me know what changes you did
> intend.
Thank you. The patches are correct.
cheers,
Ulf
Hi,
I put all three frame pointer unwinding fallback patches on
the mjw/fp-unwind branch. I'll also sent them to the list using
git send-mail --annotate taking out the binary file patches.
Hopefully that will make them appear on the list, bypassing the
spam filters.
[PATCH 1/3] Add frame pointer
15 matches
Mail list logo
