This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sourceware.org
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: [patch v8 15/24] frame, backtrace: allow targets to supply a frame unwinder
- From: Pedro Alves <palves at redhat dot com>
- To: "Metzger, Markus T" <markus dot t dot metzger at intel dot com>
- Cc: "jan dot kratochvil at redhat dot com" <jan dot kratochvil at redhat dot com>, "gdb-patches at sourceware dot org" <gdb-patches at sourceware dot org>
- Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2013 19:02:04 +0000
- Subject: Re: [patch v8 15/24] frame, backtrace: allow targets to supply a frame unwinder
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <1386839747-8860-1-git-send-email-markus dot t dot metzger at intel dot com> <1386839747-8860-16-git-send-email-markus dot t dot metzger at intel dot com> <52AB5194 dot 2050205 at redhat dot com> <A78C989F6D9628469189715575E55B230AA38BB1 at IRSMSX104 dot ger dot corp dot intel dot com>
On 12/16/2013 09:18 AM, Metzger, Markus T wrote:
>> ... parts look a bit unrelated. It'd be good to have
>> the rationale for this spelled out. I can understand
>> why they might be necessary, but I don't see why
>> target vs non-unwinders unwinders would be special here?
>
> Those changes are not directly related to target vs non-target
> unwinders. They are connected in that they allow new types
> of unwinders.
>
> I spelled out the rationale for each change in the commit
> message.
If I missed it, please point me at it. E.g., I didn't see a
rationale for the get_frame_unwind_stop_reason change.
Something like "We need to do X in get_frame_unwind_stop_reason
because otherwise, when we do Y, W doesn't work."
> Should I further split this patch into three?
IMO, yes.
Thanks,
--
Pedro Alves