| Message ID | 4F3ABB89.2090402@redhat.com |
|---|---|
| State | New |
| Headers | show |
On Tue, Feb 14, 2012 at 8:52 PM, Richard Henderson <rth@redhat.com> wrote: > On 02/14/2012 10:26 AM, Uros Bizjak wrote: >> #ifdef __x86_64__ >> + cfi_def_cfa(%rsi, 0) >> movq (%rsi), %rcx >> movq 8(%rsi), %rbx >> movq 16(%rsi), %rbp >> @@ -119,20 +120,21 @@ >> movq 32(%rsi), %r13 >> movq 40(%rsi), %r14 >> movq 48(%rsi), %r15 >> + cfi_offset(%rip, 56) >> movl %edi, %eax >> - cfi_offset(%rip, 56) >> - cfi_def_cfa(%rcx, 0) >> movq %rcx, %rsp >> + cfi_register(%rsp, %rcx) >> jmp *56(%rsi) > > No, your changes are incorrect. All three markers needed to be together > in order to provide a consistent and coherent unwind. What you committed > was much worse than simply not describing anything at all. > > Fixed as below. Committed. Thanks! Uros.
diff --git a/libitm/config/x86/sjlj.S b/libitm/config/x86/sjlj.S index 554ec98..8844228 100644 --- a/libitm/config/x86/sjlj.S +++ b/libitm/config/x86/sjlj.S @@ -112,7 +112,6 @@ SYM(_ITM_beginTransaction): SYM(GTM_longjmp): cfi_startproc #ifdef __x86_64__ - cfi_def_cfa(%rsi, 0) movq (%rsi), %rcx movq 8(%rsi), %rbx movq 16(%rsi), %rbp @@ -120,21 +119,22 @@ SYM(GTM_longjmp): movq 32(%rsi), %r13 movq 40(%rsi), %r14 movq 48(%rsi), %r15 - cfi_offset(%rip, 56) movl %edi, %eax - movq %rcx, %rsp + cfi_def_cfa(%rsi, 0) + cfi_offset(%rip, 56) cfi_register(%rsp, %rcx) + movq %rcx, %rsp jmp *56(%rsi) #else - cfi_def_cfa(%edx, 0) movl (%edx), %ecx movl 4(%edx), %ebx movl 8(%edx), %esi movl 12(%edx), %edi movl 16(%edx), %ebp + cfi_def_cfa(%edx, 0) cfi_offset(%eip, 20) - movl %ecx, %esp cfi_register(%esp, %ecx) + movl %ecx, %esp jmp *20(%edx) #endif cfi_endproc