From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from cthulhu.engr.sgi.com (cthulhu.engr.sgi.com [192.26.80.2]) by neteng.engr.sgi.com (980427.SGI.8.8.8/970903.SGI.AUTOCF) via ESMTP id LAA02158 for ; Mon, 6 Jul 1998 11:33:02 -0700 (PDT) Return-Path: Received: (from majordomo-owner@localhost) by cthulhu.engr.sgi.com (980427.SGI.8.8.8/970903.SGI.AUTOCF) id LAA35149 for linux-list; Mon, 6 Jul 1998 11:32:09 -0700 (PDT) mail_from (owner-linux@relay.engr.sgi.com) Received: from sgi.sgi.com (sgi.engr.sgi.com [192.26.80.37]) by cthulhu.engr.sgi.com (980427.SGI.8.8.8/970903.SGI.AUTOCF) via ESMTP id LAA04123 for ; Mon, 6 Jul 1998 11:32:05 -0700 (PDT) mail_from (ralf@mailhost.uni-koblenz.de) Received: from informatik.uni-koblenz.de (mailhost.uni-koblenz.de [141.26.4.1]) by sgi.sgi.com (980309.SGI.8.8.8-aspam-6.2/980304.SGI-aspam: SGI does not authorize the use of its proprietary systems or networks for unsolicited or bulk email from the Internet.) via ESMTP id LAA10399 for ; Mon, 6 Jul 1998 11:32:01 -0700 (PDT) mail_from (ralf@mailhost.uni-koblenz.de) Received: from uhland (ralf@uhland.uni-koblenz.de [141.26.4.63]) by informatik.uni-koblenz.de (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id UAA10856; Mon, 6 Jul 1998 20:31:56 +0200 (MEST) Received: by uhland (SMI-8.6/KO-2.0) id UAA06464; Mon, 6 Jul 1998 20:31:54 +0200 Message-ID: <19980706203153.03930@uni-koblenz.de> Date: Mon, 6 Jul 1998 20:31:53 +0200 From: ralf@uni-koblenz.de To: Mike Shaver Cc: linux@cthulhu.engr.sgi.com Subject: Re: mozilla on the Indy References: <359A447B.2D25377D@netscape.com> <19980702041137.I3255@uni-koblenz.de> <35A10B96.9B47C150@netscape.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 0.84e In-Reply-To: <35A10B96.9B47C150@netscape.com>; from Mike Shaver on Mon, Jul 06, 1998 at 01:38:30PM -0400 Sender: owner-linux@cthulhu.engr.sgi.com Precedence: bulk On Mon, Jul 06, 1998 at 01:38:30PM -0400, Mike Shaver wrote: > ralf@uni-koblenz.de wrote: > > Now that I've taken myself two minutes to browse your attached sources - > > the patches to the NSPR thread routines look suspicious. The are > > playing games with the frame pointer which at least on the first look > > don't make sense as gcc automatically enables -fomit-frame-pointer when > > optimizing. > > Turns out it's there only to save the FP so that you can use gdb to look > at the NSPR thread stacks during debugging. So, the fact that gcc > removes it when building optimized isn't a problem. > > For the record, NSPR threads aren't clone() threads; they're > setjmp/longjmp things. Usless effort, on MIPS debugging works without having a frame pointer. RalF