Re: x86_64 frame pointer via thread context
From: Dave Jiang (djiang_at_mvista.com)
Date: 08/08/05
- Previous message: Mark Underwood: "Re: Where is place of arch independed companion chips?"
- In reply to: Petr Vandrovec: "Re: x86_64 frame pointer via thread context"
- Next in thread: Petr Vandrovec: "Re: x86_64 frame pointer via thread context"
- Reply: Petr Vandrovec: "Re: x86_64 frame pointer via thread context"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: Mon, 08 Aug 2005 14:09:13 -0700 To: Petr Vandrovec <vandrove@vc.cvut.cz>
Petr Vandrovec wrote:
>>> Replace call to sleep() with busy loop. Glibc's sleep() uses %ebp for
>>> its own data, so when you interrupt sleep(), you get rbp=(unsigned
>>> int)-1,
>>> as rbp really contains 0x0000.0000.ffff.ffff when nanosleep() syscall
>>> is issued.
>>> Petr
>> From what I understand, when you signal a thread, the signal handler
>> executes in the thread context and not the main process context. So
>> therefore the rbp would be the thread's copy and not the one that
>> sleep() just modified. So whatever sleep does to the main process
>> context, there shouldn't be any effect on the thread context.... Also,
>> what can I call to allow the threads to run? sleep() allows me to run
>> the other threads. Busy wait does not.....
>
>
> I do not understand. You call sleep() from both threads you spawn
> (as well from main), so both threads are always interrupted in the
> sleep(2). Load your process to the debugger...
>
> #0 tb_sig_handler (sig=33, info=0x407ff2f0, ucontext=0x407ff1c0) at
> ttest1.c:26
> #1 <signal handler called>
> #2 0x00002aaaaad81335 in nanosleep () from /lib/libc.so.6
> #3 0x00002aaaaad811a5 in sleep () from /lib/libc.so.6
> #4 0x0000000000400871 in test_thread1 (arg=0x0) at ttest1.c:40
> #5 0x00002aaaaabc6b55 in start_thread () from /lib/libpthread.so.0
> #6 0x00002aaaaada87f0 in clone () from /lib/libc.so.6
Ooops, you are right. I forgot about those ones in the threads. Yes you
are right. Once the sleep goes away rBP displays the correct values. Is
this issue due to glibc or because of the toolchain? I do not have this
issues on 32bit x86.... I would assume that the reason it works on
Mandrake is due to the toolchain they use versus other distros? The
toolchain determines which registers to use and the
-fno-omit-frame-pointer did not prevent some of them from clobbering rbp?
-- Dave ------------------------------------------------------ Dave Jiang Software Engineer Phone: (480) 517-0372 MontaVista Software, Inc. Fax: (480) 517-0262 2141 E Broadway Rd, St 108 Web: www.mvista.com Tempe, AZ 85282 mailto:djiang@mvista.com ------------------------------------------------------ - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
- Previous message: Mark Underwood: "Re: Where is place of arch independed companion chips?"
- In reply to: Petr Vandrovec: "Re: x86_64 frame pointer via thread context"
- Next in thread: Petr Vandrovec: "Re: x86_64 frame pointer via thread context"
- Reply: Petr Vandrovec: "Re: x86_64 frame pointer via thread context"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|