Re: [PATCH] Unwinding CFI for x86_64 signal frame (__restore_rt)

[Jan Kratochvil <jan dot kratochvil at redhat dot com>]

Hi Jakub,

On Wed, 29 Nov 2006 00:44:09 +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
...
> Not sure, but perhaps it would be more readable if the .eh_frame asm
> wasn't in the macro, but just an extra asm () below the RESTORE.
> There is just one RESTORE, you'd just add the nop and .LSTART_restore_rt
> and .LEND_restore_rt symbols to the RESTORE macro, and you could get rid of
> all the \'s at the end of the lines, #name uglification etc.
> Perhaps the RESTORE macro could be dropped altogether, all we need
> is something like CFI_STRINGIFY which would be defined unconditionally
> and use it for the syscall number.
> Guess Ulrich should decide how he wants it to look like.

this idea was dropped as we discussed before.


Other suggested changes were integrated.  Minor .byte->.uleb128 length
fix+change, I hope it does not violate the intended coding style.

Tested with libunwind run-ptrace-stepper.


Best Regards,
Jan

Attachment: glibc-signal-frame-unwind3.patch
Description: Text document

Attachment: glibc-signal-frame-unwind-2-to-3.metapatch
Description: Text document