This is the mail archive of the
ecos-devel@sourceware.org
mailing list for the eCos project.
Re: eCos GNU tools 4.6.2-20120125 ready for testing
- From: Sergei Gavrikov <sergei dot gavrikov at gmail dot com>
- To: Alex Schuilenburg <alexs at ecoscentric dot com>
- Cc: John Dallaway <john at dallaway dot org dot uk>, Ilija Kocho <ilijak at siva dot com dot mk>, eCos developers <ecos-devel at ecos dot sourceware dot org>
- Date: Mon, 5 Mar 2012 10:59:54 +0300 (FET)
- Subject: Re: eCos GNU tools 4.6.2-20120125 ready for testing
- Authentication-results: mr.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of sergei.gavrikov@gmail.com designates 10.213.9.197 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=sergei.gavrikov@gmail.com; dkim=pass header.i=sergei.gavrikov@gmail.com
- References: <4F106345.4080902@siva.com.mk> <4F11574D.9070002@dallaway.org.uk> <4F11AC54.7000902@siva.com.mk> <4F1CB41C.90900@jifvik.org> <4F1DA9A0.5070702@siva.com.mk> <4F1FF5AD.4010901@ecoscentric.com> <4F39887A.5050905@siva.com.mk> <4F50F700.5080902@ecoscentric.com> <4F521D6A.4010500@siva.com.mk> <4F52B2C8.4010809@schuilenburg.org> <4F53C46B.4090502@dallaway.org.uk> <4F53FF0D.80107@ecoscentric.com>
On Sun, 4 Mar 2012, Alex Schuilenburg wrote:
> On 04/03/2012 19:37, John Dallaway wrote:
> > Hi Alex
> >
> > Alex Schuilenburg wrote:
[snip]
> >> There is only one issue uncovered so far, and that is the backtrace
> >> of gdb 7.3 is unreliable. It occasionally can end up in an
> >> infinite loop, while our own 7.2 gdb for eCosPro works just fine in
> >> exactly the same tests (i.e. built with gcc 4.6.2). However, I
> >> guess users could add a "set backtracelimit=100" and that should
> >> catch this issue.
> > That is useful info, thank you. Could you provide examples of the
> > infinite backtrace please? We need to understand which of the
> > backtrace backstops is missing or ineffective.
>
> kexcept1 and except1 backtrace fail in every perm with 7.3 gdb.
I confirm it (I got the same for ARM7 target), it seems to me this is
old story http://bugs.ecos.sourceware.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1000699
But, if GDB 7.2 (I hope it was not patched a lot :-) manages that
properly, I would stick on GDB 7.2 (I will test it).
Thank you for your information!
Sergei