[Ltrace-devel] [PATCH] Add support for using elfutils as unwinder.
Petr Machata
pmachata at redhat.com
Thu Jan 9 21:09:25 UTC 2014
Mark Wielaard <mjw at redhat.com> writes:
> In the ltrace case it might just be enough to print > [...] in case of
> any error to indicate we don't know whether or not there should be more
> frames (beyond the -w <NR> limit).
>
>> I still wonder what your opinion is though. It seems as if
>> dwfl_thread_getframes should return a different error number on line
>> 436, but that ship has sailed.
>
> Yeah, but it is hard to know which one. Since there are various things
> that can cause us getting in that error state. The stack could be
> corrupted, missing .eh_frame, corrupted/bad CFI data, etc. And on a
> modern up to date system it really should return success.
I meant returning e.g. -2 instead of -1 as a result, just to indicate
that it unwound something, but had to give up. Your solution with
"[...]" seems reasonable.
Thanks,
PM
More information about the Ltrace-devel
mailing list