Johannes Bauer <jb....@gmx.de> wrote: > When sporadic deadlocks occur in a system, a stacktrace can really > help find bugs.
Yes, I know. I usually end up in manually inspecting the stack then, as this requires no specific compilation options. As I only have to do it once a year or so, this never bothered me too much (and I could successfully dig up memory corruptions going into IO space that way, which in turn triggered an unexpected interrupt, and other "nice" gotchas). > I think stack unwinding in-system could be useful for > other people as well. Well, most people debug using AVR Studio, which has even less ideas about the GCC call stack than AVR-GDB does. AVR Studio even lacks the ability to display out-of-scope variables, yet most people appear to just live with that. I doubt there's a very broad audience for improved stackframes -- as I said, people do care for the amount of code generated, next they do care for the code size, then they compare the generated code size with compiler XYZ, and only then they start comparing other features. :-/ > Could you please point me to where I should look/poke around in > order to get this resolved? Sorry, I'm not a compiler guy. I don't have any clues about the compiler internals. -- cheers, J"org .-.-. --... ...-- -.. . DL8DTL http://www.sax.de/~joerg/ NIC: JW11-RIPE Never trust an operating system you don't have sources for. ;-) _______________________________________________ AVR-GCC-list mailing list AVR-GCC-list@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/avr-gcc-list
