Most compilers emit the same thing for EH frame and for .debug_frame. If this does indeed differ, then LLDB should parse both, but any such changes should really do so in a way that prefers .debug_frame over .eh_frame since .debug_frame should be complete unwind info even though it is just he same as the .eh_frame for most compilers.
> On Nov 24, 2015, at 5:50 AM, Ravitheja Addepally via lldb-dev > <lldb-dev@lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > Hello, > While compiling with clang for i386, I notice that the CFI information > is distributed between the .eh_frame section and the .debug_frame section, > meaning for some functions the CFI info is present in the .debug_frame > section whereas for some it is present in the .eh_frame. Now looking at the > lldb code, I see that this information is only read from the .eh_frame > section and not from the .debug_frame section. My questions are the following > -> > 1) Is there something that I missing ? is the information that I provided in > this email correct ? > 2) If it is correct, is this expected behavior ? I mean if the CFI info is > present in the .debug_frame then I think it should be read ? coz it maybe > useful in unwinding scenarios ? > > > BR, > A Ravi > > _______________________________________________ > lldb-dev mailing list > lldb-dev@lists.llvm.org > http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-dev _______________________________________________ lldb-dev mailing list lldb-dev@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-dev
