On Fri, Jan 24, 2025 at 05:41:29PM +0100, Jens Remus wrote: > On 22.01.2025 03:31, Josh Poimboeuf wrote: > > +int unwind_user_next(struct unwind_user_state *state) > > +{ > > + struct unwind_user_frame _frame; > > + struct unwind_user_frame *frame = &_frame; > > + unsigned long cfa = 0, fp, ra = 0; > > Why are cfa and ra initialized to zero? Where is that important in > subsequent patches? > > "[PATCH v4 12/39] unwind_user: Add frame pointer support" does either > unconditionally set both cfa and ra or bail out.
Right, probably leftovers from some previous iteration. I drop those. -- Josh