Re: [RFC/hppa] Change handling of stubs in the return path

[Daniel Jacobowitz <drow at false dot org>]

On Mon, Dec 06, 2004 at 03:27:23PM -0800, Randolph Chung wrote:
> > Does this work OK when single stepping out of something, i.e. back into
> > a stub?
> 
> when you step out of a function that was called with a stub, you end up 
> back at the caller, not the stub. is that what you mean? (when we step
> into the stub, gdb detects that it is in a solib return trampoline and
> runs the inferior until it is out of the trampoline). that part is not
> really affected by this patch though.

When you step one instruction out of the function, you go from "frame
A, called by frame B" to "frame C, called by frame B".  Does GDB get
confused by this?  Try using "step"; it may decide that frame C was
called by frame A, and resume.

I guess that doesn't matter.  What usually happens in this case is GDB
loses control; but if it does, it will just hit the dummy frame
breakpoint, so who cares?

> 
> > > +static void
> > > +hppa_hpux_unwind_adjust_stub(struct frame_info *next_frame, CORE_ADDR base,
> > > +			     struct trad_frame_saved_reg *saved_regs)
> > 
> > Formatting ;-)
> 
> sorry, the original version is ok, but i did some manual editting of the
> file with vim that had expandtab set...

I meant the missing space after _stub.

-- 
Daniel Jacobowitz