This is the mail archive of the gdb@sources.redhat.com mailing list for the GDB project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: i386-linux signal backtraces broken


On Thu, Oct 10, 2002 at 12:06:06PM -0700, Kevin Buettner wrote:
> On Oct 10,  2:47pm, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
> 
> > We have two choices, that I see:
> >   - Call the code inspection functions always
> >   - Call the code inspection functions if the name is sigaction, taking
> >     advantage of the glibc implementation detail that sigaction is the
> >     only exported name for this function that I can see, and they are
> >     implemented right after it in the same file.
> > 
> > Option (A) is a performance hit.  Option (B) is, well, a little fragile.
> > 
> > Thoughts?
> 
> It sounds to me like option (A) is the way to go.  How bad is the
> performance hit?

Hard to say, since I don't have any way to test GDB's reaction speed...
it's going to mean at least one more read from target memory per frame
in a backtrace, for instance.

-- 
Daniel Jacobowitz
MontaVista Software                         Debian GNU/Linux Developer


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]