From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E1E4BC433EF for ; Mon, 7 Mar 2022 18:20:46 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost ([::1]:51056 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1nRHyQ-0000NU-03 for qemu-devel@archiver.kernel.org; Mon, 07 Mar 2022 13:20:46 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:47042) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1nRHDu-0003hK-O2 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 07 Mar 2022 12:32:42 -0500 Received: from qproxy1-pub.mail.unifiedlayer.com ([173.254.64.10]:37509) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1nRHDs-0006xA-4W for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 07 Mar 2022 12:32:41 -0500 Received: from outbound-ss-761.bluehost.com (outbound-ss-761.bluehost.com [74.220.211.250]) by qproxy1.mail.unifiedlayer.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D93A4802E89F for ; Mon, 7 Mar 2022 17:32:37 +0000 (UTC) Received: from cmgw11.mail.unifiedlayer.com (unknown [10.0.90.126]) by progateway8.mail.pro1.eigbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 601D610047AAD for ; Mon, 7 Mar 2022 17:30:37 +0000 (UTC) Received: from box5379.bluehost.com ([162.241.216.53]) by cmsmtp with ESMTP id RHBsnwgSxwm8iRHBtny8sy; Mon, 07 Mar 2022 17:30:37 +0000 X-Authority-Reason: nr=8 X-Authority-Analysis: v=2.4 cv=DpSTREz+ c=1 sm=1 tr=0 ts=6226413d a=ApxJNpeYhEAb1aAlGBBbmA==:117 a=ApxJNpeYhEAb1aAlGBBbmA==:17 a=dLZJa+xiwSxG16/P+YVxDGlgEgI=:19 a=o8Y5sQTvuykA:10:nop_rcvd_month_year a=Qbun_eYptAEA:10:endurance_base64_authed_username_1 a=2mottZ3TzAcfEraIx6QA:9 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=tromey.com; s=default; h=Content-Type:MIME-Version:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:Date:References :Subject:Cc:To:From:Sender:Reply-To:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID: Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc :Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe: List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=OiQd9bmJK/1bRHjOOTVLJnOzNeuSIhQa++nU1UsQMww=; b=dNCJsc5PUYmQ00GUXBJIPxunYG eSmRisIcezk8tGd3ft2o74Jp1dESeL+3fEHCBMn5EbISdKKJKLnovjLOuyfV19F9T4VBJ+jlbglEl ozTYojqs7m+2g18IN0EbJlVVW; Received: from 75-166-141-253.hlrn.qwest.net ([75.166.141.253]:47640 helo=prentzel) by box5379.bluehost.com with esmtpsa (TLS1.2) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from ) id 1nRHBs-0047PU-AM; Mon, 07 Mar 2022 10:30:36 -0700 From: Tom Tromey To: Florian Weimer Subject: Re: How to backtrace an separate stack? References: <87sfrtakce.fsf@oldenburg.str.redhat.com> X-Attribution: Tom Date: Mon, 07 Mar 2022 10:30:35 -0700 In-Reply-To: <87sfrtakce.fsf@oldenburg.str.redhat.com> (Florian Weimer's message of "Mon, 07 Mar 2022 15:49:37 +0100") Message-ID: <87fsnt1xhg.fsf@tromey.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - box5379.bluehost.com X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - nongnu.org X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12] X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - tromey.com X-BWhitelist: no X-Source-IP: 75.166.141.253 X-Source-L: No X-Exim-ID: 1nRHBs-0047PU-AM X-Source: X-Source-Args: X-Source-Dir: X-Source-Sender: 75-166-141-253.hlrn.qwest.net (prentzel) [75.166.141.253]:47640 X-Source-Auth: tom+tromey.com X-Email-Count: 4 X-Source-Cap: ZWx5bnJvYmk7ZWx5bnJvYmk7Ym94NTM3OS5ibHVlaG9zdC5jb20= X-Local-Domain: yes Received-SPF: pass client-ip=173.254.64.10; envelope-from=tom@tromey.com; helo=qproxy1-pub.mail.unifiedlayer.com X-Spam_score_int: -18 X-Spam_score: -1.9 X-Spam_bar: - X-Spam_report: (-1.9 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01 autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-Mailman-Approved-At: Mon, 07 Mar 2022 13:16:26 -0500 X-BeenThere: qemu-devel@nongnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: pedro@palves.net, Stefan Hajnoczi via Gdb , qemu-devel@nongnu.org, "Dr. David Alan Gilbert" , Stefan Hajnoczi , tom@tromey.com Errors-To: qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Sender: "Qemu-devel" Florian> I'm a bit surprised by this. Conceptually, why would GDB need to know Florian> about stack boundaries? Is there some heuristic to detect broken Florian> frames? Yes, the infamous "previous frame inner to this frame" error message. I think this is primarily intended to detect stack trashing, but maybe it also serves to work around bad debuginfo or bugs in the unwinders. This error was disabled for cases where the GCC split stack feature is used. There's been requests to disable it in other cases as well, I think. Tom