On Fri, 6 Nov 2020, Jeff Law wrote:
On 9/8/20 9:34 AM, Martin Storsjö wrote:
Hi,
On Tue, 8 Sep 2020, Kirill Müller wrote:
Thanks for the heads up. The coincidence is funny -- a file that
hasn't been touched for years.
I think we both may originally be triggered from the same guy asking
ar
On 9/8/20 9:34 AM, Martin Storsjö wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Tue, 8 Sep 2020, Kirill Müller wrote:
>
>> Thanks for the heads up. The coincidence is funny -- a file that
>> hasn't been touched for years.
>
> I think we both may originally be triggered from the same guy asking
> around in different places
Hi,
On Tue, 8 Sep 2020, Kirill Müller wrote:
I haven't actually tested if the cfa value (ms_context.Rsp) is valid, I also
see no reason why it shouldn't be.
What does it take for your patch to be accepted? What's the minimum gcc
version where it will be available?
I'm not a maintainer nor a
Hi
Thanks for the explanation, this makes sense now.
I haven't actually tested if the cfa value (ms_context.Rsp) is valid, I
also see no reason why it shouldn't be.
What does it take for your patch to be accepted? What's the minimum gcc
version where it will be available?
Best regards
K
Hi,
On Tue, 8 Sep 2020, Kirill Müller wrote:
Thanks for the heads up. The coincidence is funny -- a file
that hasn't been touched for years.
I think we both may originally be triggered from the same guy asking
around in different places about implementations of _Unwind_Backtrace for
windows
Hi
Thanks for the heads up. The coincidence is funny -- a file that hasn't
been touched for years.
I do believe that we need the logic around the `first` flag for
consistency with the other unwind-*.c implementations. This can be
verified by running the tests in the included libbacktrace li
Hi,
On Mon, 7 Sep 2020, Kirill Müller via Gcc-patches wrote:
As requested, attaching a patch for
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96948. This solves a problem
with _Unwind_Backtrace() on mingw64 + SEH.
What a coincidence - I actually sent a patch for the exact same thing
last we
