[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Tinycc-devel] [PATCH] arm: Handle __builtin_frame_address(1) correc
From: |
Thomas Preud'homme |
Subject: |
Re: [Tinycc-devel] [PATCH] arm: Handle __builtin_frame_address(1) correctly |
Date: |
Wed, 5 Dec 2012 11:26:32 +0100 |
User-agent: |
KMail/1.13.7 (Linux/3.2.0-4-amd64; KDE/4.8.4; x86_64; ; ) |
Le vendredi 30 novembre 2012 00:43:07, Daniel Glöckner a écrit :
>
> You should not look at a leaf function to derive the GCC stack frame.
> It is probably different from the generic stack frame because GCC
> knows this function will never be part of a stack trace done by
> another function of the final program.
>
> Take a look at arch/arm/kernel/stacktrace.c inside the Linux kernel.
> They assume that every function pushes {fp, sp, lr, pc} and that
> fp points to the address where pc is stored. I don't know why
> GCC pushes pc. I can only imagine this being done to keep the
> stack aligned to 8 bytes. Or maybe it is for exception handling
> or association of stack frame debug info..
> I have once seen a page in MSDN describing the ARM stack frame of
> Windows CE. I don't know if ARM specified how stack frames should look
> like.
Hi Kirill,
did you make any progress on the issue since Daniel's comments? Could you let
me know when you push a patch so that I can test it and bump master to equal
the mob branch?
Grischka, what do you think of releasing a rc1 after that? We got plenty of
features merged since last release and 3 years start to be quite a long time.
I know there is still many things to improve, including some I care about, but
it might attract new contributions or new users to have a more recent release.
What do you think?
Best regards,
Thomas Preud'homme
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
- Re: [Tinycc-devel] [PATCH] arm: Handle __builtin_frame_address(1) correctly,
Thomas Preud'homme <=
- Re: [Tinycc-devel] [PATCH] arm: Handle __builtin_frame_address(1) correctly, Kirill Smelkov, 2012/12/05
- Re: [Tinycc-devel] [PATCH] arm: Handle __builtin_frame_address(1) correctly, Thomas Preud'homme, 2012/12/06
- Re: [Tinycc-devel] [PATCH] arm: Handle __builtin_frame_address(1) correctly, Kirill Smelkov, 2012/12/09
- Re: [Tinycc-devel] [PATCH] arm: Handle __builtin_frame_address(1) correctly, grischka, 2012/12/09
- [Tinycc-devel] Fixes to bcheck and how it works correctly, Kirill Smelkov, 2012/12/11
- Re: [Tinycc-devel] Fixes to bcheck and how it works correctly, grischka, 2012/12/12
- Re: [Tinycc-devel] Fixes to bcheck and how it works correctly, Kirill Smelkov, 2012/12/21
- Re: [Tinycc-devel] Fixes to bcheck and how it works correctly, grischka, 2012/12/12
- Re: [Tinycc-devel] [PATCH] arm: Handle __builtin_frame_address(1) correctly, Kirill Smelkov, 2012/12/13
Re: [Tinycc-devel] [PATCH] arm: Handle __builtin_frame_address(1) correctly, grischka, 2012/12/06