#include "annotate.h"
#include "language.h"
#include "frame-unwind.h"
+#include "command.h"
+#include "gdbcmd.h"
+
+/* Flag to indicate whether backtraces should stop at main. */
+
+static int backtrace_below_main;
/* Return a frame uniq ID that can be used to, later, re-find the
frame. */
deprecated_read_register_gen (regnum, raw_buffer);
}
+/* Determine the frame's type based on its PC. */
+
+static enum frame_type
+frame_type_from_pc (CORE_ADDR pc)
+{
+ /* FIXME: cagney/2002-11-24: Can't yet directly call
+ pc_in_dummy_frame() as some architectures don't set
+ PC_IN_CALL_DUMMY() to generic_pc_in_call_dummy() (remember the
+ latter is implemented by simply calling pc_in_dummy_frame). */
+ if (DEPRECATED_USE_GENERIC_DUMMY_FRAMES
+ && DEPRECATED_PC_IN_CALL_DUMMY (pc, 0, 0))
+ return DUMMY_FRAME;
+ else
+ {
+ char *name;
+ find_pc_partial_function (pc, &name, NULL, NULL);
+ if (PC_IN_SIGTRAMP (pc, name))
+ return SIGTRAMP_FRAME;
+ else
+ return NORMAL_FRAME;
+ }
+}
+
/* Create an arbitrary (i.e. address specified by user) or innermost frame.
Always returns a non-NULL value. */
create_new_frame (CORE_ADDR addr, CORE_ADDR pc)
{
struct frame_info *fi;
- enum frame_type type;
fi = frame_obstack_zalloc (sizeof (struct frame_info));
fi->frame = addr;
fi->pc = pc;
- /* NOTE: cagney/2002-11-18: The code segments, found in
- create_new_frame and get_prev_frame(), that initializes the
- frames type is subtly different. The latter only updates ->type
- when it encounters a SIGTRAMP_FRAME or DUMMY_FRAME. This stops
- get_prev_frame() overriding the frame's type when the INIT code
- has previously set it. This is really somewhat bogus. The
- initialization, as seen in create_new_frame(), should occur
- before the INIT function has been called. */
- if (DEPRECATED_USE_GENERIC_DUMMY_FRAMES
- && (DEPRECATED_PC_IN_CALL_DUMMY_P ()
- ? DEPRECATED_PC_IN_CALL_DUMMY (pc, 0, 0)
- : pc_in_dummy_frame (pc)))
- /* NOTE: cagney/2002-11-11: Does this even occure? */
- type = DUMMY_FRAME;
- else
- {
- char *name;
- find_pc_partial_function (pc, &name, NULL, NULL);
- if (PC_IN_SIGTRAMP (fi->pc, name))
- type = SIGTRAMP_FRAME;
- else
- type = NORMAL_FRAME;
- }
- fi->type = type;
+ fi->type = frame_type_from_pc (pc);
if (INIT_EXTRA_FRAME_INFO_P ())
INIT_EXTRA_FRAME_INFO (0, fi);
}
}
-/* Return a structure containing various interesting information
- about the frame that called NEXT_FRAME. Returns NULL
- if there is no such frame. */
+/* Create the previous frame using the deprecated methods
+ INIT_EXTRA_INFO, INIT_FRAME_PC and INIT_FRAME_PC_FIRST. */
-struct frame_info *
-get_prev_frame (struct frame_info *next_frame)
+static struct frame_info *
+legacy_get_prev_frame (struct frame_info *next_frame)
{
CORE_ADDR address = 0;
struct frame_info *prev;
int fromleaf;
- /* Return the inner-most frame, when the caller passes in NULL. */
- /* NOTE: cagney/2002-11-09: Not sure how this would happen. The
- caller should have previously obtained a valid frame using
- get_selected_frame() and then called this code - only possibility
- I can think of is code behaving badly. */
- if (next_frame == NULL)
- {
- /* NOTE: cagney/2002-11-09: There was a code segment here that
- would error out when CURRENT_FRAME was NULL. The comment
- that went with it made the claim ...
-
- ``This screws value_of_variable, which just wants a nice
- clean NULL return from block_innermost_frame if there are no
- frames. I don't think I've ever seen this message happen
- otherwise. And returning NULL here is a perfectly legitimate
- thing to do.''
-
- Per the above, this code shouldn't even be called with a NULL
- NEXT_FRAME. */
- return current_frame;
- }
-
- /* Only try to do the unwind once. */
- if (next_frame->prev_p)
- return next_frame->prev;
- next_frame->prev_p = 1;
+ /* This code only works on normal frames. A sentinel frame, where
+ the level is -1, should never reach this code. */
+ gdb_assert (next_frame->level >= 0);
/* On some machines it is possible to call a function without
setting up a stack frame for it. On these machines, we
/* Still don't want to worry about this except on the innermost
frame. This macro will set FROMLEAF if NEXT_FRAME is a frameless
function invocation. */
- if (next_frame->next == NULL)
+ if (next_frame->level == 0)
/* FIXME: 2002-11-09: Frameless functions can occure anywhere in
the frame chain, not just the inner most frame! The generic,
per-architecture, frame code should handle this and the below
return prev;
}
+/* Return a structure containing various interesting information
+ about the frame that called NEXT_FRAME. Returns NULL
+ if there is no such frame. */
+
+struct frame_info *
+get_prev_frame (struct frame_info *next_frame)
+{
+ struct frame_info *prev_frame;
+
+ /* Return the inner-most frame, when the caller passes in NULL. */
+ /* NOTE: cagney/2002-11-09: Not sure how this would happen. The
+ caller should have previously obtained a valid frame using
+ get_selected_frame() and then called this code - only possibility
+ I can think of is code behaving badly.
+
+ NOTE: cagney/2003-01-10: Talk about code behaving badly. Check
+ block_innermost_frame(). It does the sequence: frame = NULL;
+ while (1) { frame = get_prev_frame (frame); .... }. Ulgh! Why
+ it couldn't be written better, I don't know.
+
+ NOTE: cagney/2003-01-11: I suspect what is happening is
+ block_innermost_frame() is, when the target has no state
+ (registers, memory, ...), still calling this function. The
+ assumption being that this function will return NULL indicating
+ that a frame isn't possible, rather than checking that the target
+ has state and then calling get_current_frame() and
+ get_prev_frame(). This is a guess mind. */
+ if (next_frame == NULL)
+ {
+ /* NOTE: cagney/2002-11-09: There was a code segment here that
+ would error out when CURRENT_FRAME was NULL. The comment
+ that went with it made the claim ...
+
+ ``This screws value_of_variable, which just wants a nice
+ clean NULL return from block_innermost_frame if there are no
+ frames. I don't think I've ever seen this message happen
+ otherwise. And returning NULL here is a perfectly legitimate
+ thing to do.''
+
+ Per the above, this code shouldn't even be called with a NULL
+ NEXT_FRAME. */
+ return current_frame;
+ }
+
+ /* There is always a frame. If this assertion fails, suspect that
+ something should be calling get_selected_frame() or
+ get_current_frame(). */
+ gdb_assert (next_frame != NULL);
+
+ if (next_frame->level >= 0
+ && !backtrace_below_main
+ && inside_main_func (get_frame_pc (next_frame)))
+ /* Don't unwind past main(), bug always unwind the sentinel frame.
+ Note, this is done _before_ the frame has been marked as
+ previously unwound. That way if the user later decides to
+ allow unwinds past main(), that just happens. */
+ return NULL;
+
+ /* Only try to do the unwind once. */
+ if (next_frame->prev_p)
+ return next_frame->prev;
+ next_frame->prev_p = 1;
+
+ /* If we're inside the entry file, it isn't valid. */
+ /* NOTE: drow/2002-12-25: should there be a way to disable this
+ check? It assumes a single small entry file, and the way some
+ debug readers (e.g. dbxread) figure out which object is the
+ entry file is somewhat hokey. */
+ /* NOTE: cagney/2003-01-10: If there is a way of disabling this test
+ then it should probably be moved to before the ->prev_p test,
+ above. */
+ if (inside_entry_file (get_frame_pc (next_frame)))
+ return NULL;
+
+ /* If any of the old frame initialization methods are around, use
+ the legacy get_prev_frame method. Just don't try to unwind a
+ sentinel frame using that method - it doesn't work. All sentinal
+ frames use the new unwind code. */
+ if ((DEPRECATED_INIT_FRAME_PC_P ()
+ || DEPRECATED_INIT_FRAME_PC_FIRST_P ()
+ || INIT_EXTRA_FRAME_INFO_P ())
+ && next_frame->level >= 0)
+ return legacy_get_prev_frame (next_frame);
+
+ /* Allocate the new frame but do not wire it in to the frame chain.
+ Some (bad) code in INIT_FRAME_EXTRA_INFO tries to look along
+ frame->next to pull some fancy tricks (of course such code is, by
+ definition, recursive). Try to prevent it.
+
+ There is no reason to worry about memory leaks, should the
+ remainder of the function fail. The allocated memory will be
+ quickly reclaimed when the frame cache is flushed, and the `we've
+ been here before' check above will stop repeated memory
+ allocation calls. */
+ prev_frame = FRAME_OBSTACK_ZALLOC (struct frame_info);
+ prev_frame->level = next_frame->level + 1;
+
+ /* Try to unwind the PC. If that doesn't work, assume we've reached
+ the oldest frame and simply return. Is there a better sentinal
+ value? The unwound PC value is then used to initialize the new
+ previous frame's type.
+
+ Note that the pc-unwind is intentionally performed before the
+ frame chain. This is ok since, for old targets, both
+ frame_pc_unwind (nee, FRAME_SAVED_PC) and FRAME_CHAIN()) assume
+ NEXT_FRAME's data structures have already been initialized (using
+ INIT_EXTRA_FRAME_INFO) and hence the call order doesn't matter.
+
+ By unwinding the PC first, it becomes possible to, in the case of
+ a dummy frame, avoid also unwinding the frame ID. This is
+ because (well ignoring the PPC) a dummy frame can be located
+ using NEXT_FRAME's frame ID. */
+
+ prev_frame->pc = frame_pc_unwind (next_frame);
+ if (prev_frame->pc == 0)
+ /* The allocated PREV_FRAME will be reclaimed when the frame
+ obstack is next purged. */
+ return NULL;
+ prev_frame->type = frame_type_from_pc (prev_frame->pc);
+
+ /* Set the unwind functions based on that identified PC. */
+ prev_frame->unwind = frame_unwind_find_by_pc (current_gdbarch,
+ prev_frame->pc);
+
+ /* FIXME: cagney/2003-01-13: A dummy frame doesn't need to unwind
+ the frame ID because the frame ID comes from the previous frame.
+ The other frames do though. True? */
+ {
+ /* FIXME: cagney/2002-12-18: Instead of this hack, should just
+ save the frame ID directly. */
+ struct frame_id id = frame_id_unwind (next_frame);
+ if (!frame_id_p (id))
+ return NULL;
+ prev_frame->frame = id.base;
+ }
+
+ /* Link it in. */
+ next_frame->prev = prev_frame;
+ prev_frame->next = next_frame;
+
+ /* FIXME: cagney/2002-01-19: This call will go away. Instead of
+ initializing extra info, all frames will use the frame_cache
+ (passed to the unwind functions) to store additional frame info.
+ Unfortunatly legacy targets can't use legacy_get_prev_frame() to
+ unwind the sentinel frame and, consequently, are forced to take
+ this code path and rely on the below call to INIT_EXTR_FRAME_INFO
+ to initialize the inner-most frame. */
+ if (INIT_EXTRA_FRAME_INFO_P ())
+ {
+ gdb_assert (prev_frame->level == 0);
+ INIT_EXTRA_FRAME_INFO (0, prev_frame);
+ }
+
+ return prev_frame;
+}
+
CORE_ADDR
get_frame_pc (struct frame_info *frame)
{
_initialize_frame (void)
{
obstack_init (&frame_cache_obstack);
+
+ /* FIXME: cagney/2003-01-19: This command needs a rename. Suggest
+ `set backtrace {past,beyond,...}-main'. Also suggest adding `set
+ backtrace ...-start' to control backtraces past start. The
+ problem with `below' is that it stops the `up' command. */
+
+ add_setshow_boolean_cmd ("backtrace-below-main", class_obscure,
+ &backtrace_below_main, "\
+Set whether backtraces should continue past \"main\".\n\
+Normally the caller of \"main\" is not of interest, so GDB will terminate\n\
+the backtrace at \"main\". Set this variable if you need to see the rest\n\
+of the stack trace.", "\
+Show whether backtraces should continue past \"main\".\n\
+Normally the caller of \"main\" is not of interest, so GDB will terminate\n\
+the backtrace at \"main\". Set this variable if you need to see the rest\n\
+of the stack trace.",
+ NULL, NULL, &setlist, &showlist);
}
projects / binutils-gdb.git / commitdiff