[Bug debug/42380] CFI statements vs. -pg

2010-01-06 Thread tschwinge at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #5 from tschwinge at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-06 17:57 --- This bug exists, by the way, not only when GCC is emitting CFI statements, but also when it's emitting .debug_frame directly. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42380

[Bug debug/42380] CFI statements vs. -pg

2009-12-17 Thread ramana at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #4 from ramana at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-17 10:49 --- Confirmed - -- ramana at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCON

[Bug debug/42380] CFI statements vs. -pg

2009-12-16 Thread drow at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #3 from drow at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-16 13:15 --- The CFA also needs to be adjusted after __gnu_mcount_nc returns; __gnu_mcount_nc is a pop instruction from the point-of-view of the caller. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42380

[Bug debug/42380] CFI statements vs. -pg

2009-12-16 Thread tschwinge at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #2 from tschwinge at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-16 09:58 --- As a tiny, years-old pointer: in , Daniel J. suggested that ``appropriate dwarf2 frame gunk'' should be added. -- tschwinge at gcc dot gnu dot org chang

[Bug debug/42380] CFI statements vs. -pg

2009-12-15 Thread tschwinge at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #1 from tschwinge at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-15 16:57 --- Richard Earnshaw wrote: > I'm not sure what other architectures do in this case. Do they also put > out adjustments to the cfi? I had a look at x86 and x86_64 -- they still need a frame pointer together with -pg