This is the mail archive of the
binutils@sourceware.org
mailing list for the binutils project.
Re: Testing Call frame information in .debug_frame section
- From: Richard Henderson <rth at redhat dot com>
- To: Anitha Boyapati <anitha dot boyapati at gmail dot com>
- Cc: gdb at sourceware dot org, binutils at sourceware dot org
- Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2011 10:48:32 -0800
- Subject: Re: Testing Call frame information in .debug_frame section
- References: <AANLkTim6hyXysiV-025BDgNJ84qaqTnkRdHi+e7bF2gx@mail.gmail.com> <AANLkTi=Rnu-wb2W8FejN=XQHmHuTq7rZovKuDdO-QLwi@mail.gmail.com> <AANLkTimOXF1V__SSFs1gtqJh5nc183EdeHm5NoeU6YXs@mail.gmail.com> <AANLkTike2osnZS=sUphuN_=oFQLCDUs54uuGCWL6cLVQ@mail.gmail.com> <4D5ABAB2.2000405@redhat.com> <AANLkTimsONAopvYx9LxwEn3+EKgrXhNV-ZdKAvV4g=e-@mail.gmail.com>
On 02/15/2011 10:09 AM, Anitha Boyapati wrote:
> I am a little confused here. I was under the impression that changes
> to GCC files alone would suffice. I am missing something here. Are the
> above mentioned changes required for assembling CFI information in
> assembly files in binutils?
GCC *can* produce cfi information by itself without assembler help,
but can produce slightly more compact cfi information *with* help.
In addition, with assembler support it's easy to write cfi info to
go along with hand-written assembly.
r~