This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sourceware.org
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: [RFC 2/5] Frame unwinding using struct value
- From: Daniel Jacobowitz <drow at false dot org>
- To: gdb-patches at sourceware dot org
- Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2008 11:28:26 -0400
- Subject: Re: [RFC 2/5] Frame unwinding using struct value
- References: <20080331221024.GA22334@caradoc.them.org> <u3aq6meyp.fsf@gnu.org>
As usual, thank you for the comments.
On Tue, Apr 01, 2008 at 06:27:58AM +0300, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> Thanks, this part is approved, but I have some comments:
>
> > +@node Stack Frames
> > +@chapter Stack Frames
> > +
> > +@cindex frame
> > +@cindex call stack frame
> > +A frame is a construct that @value{GDBN} uses to keep track of calling
> > +and called functions.
> > +
> > +@cindex frame, unwind
>
> It is not useful to have several index entries that begin with the
> same string and point to the same page. So I suggest to replace the
> last one with "@cindex unwind frame".
Sure; I was just moving these, but let's take the opportunity to
improve it further.
> > +Developers wishing to learn more about unwinders, are encouraged to
> > +read the @sc{dwarf} specification.
>
> How about a pointer to the DWARF Spec here?
Sounds good. I expect it will stay on dwarfstd.org for a while; it's
had several homes in the last few years.
> > +is a sentinel frame, then @code{get_frame_type (@var{f}) ==
> > +SENTINEL_FRAME}.
>
> I would use @equiv{} here, of even @expansion{}, instead of a literal
> "==".
Interesting, I didn't know about those. I like the block
of C code -- if you want to check whether something is a sentinel
frame in GDB, you type get_frame_type (f) == SENTINEL_FRAME -- but
@equiv will do nicely too so I'll use that.
> > +@section Selecting an Unwinder
>
> Is it a good idea to have a section without a node?
That's how most of the gdbint manual is currently arranged - one node
per chapter, except for a few more substantial ones. I can move the
new sections into nodes if you think that's better.
> Please add an @findex entry for each function you mention.
Done.
> I think we should say "lvalue" here, not "lval".
Fixed.
> > +Same as @code{frame_unwind_got_constant}, excep that the value is a target
> ^^^^^
> A typo.
Also fixed.
I'll repost the final patch in a little while.
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery