mirror of
https://sourceware.org/git/binutils-gdb.git
synced 2025-01-18 12:24:38 +08:00
Remove verbose code from backtrace command
In https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2017-06/msg00741.html, Pedro asks: > Doesn't the "info verbose on" bit affect frame filters too? The answer is that yes, it could. However, it's not completely effective, because the C code can't guess how many frames might need to be unwound to satisfy the request -- a frame filter will request as many frames as it needs. Also, I tried removing this code from backtrace, and I think the result is better without it. In particular, now the expansion line occurs just before the frame that caused the expansion, like: (gdb) bt no-filters #0 0x00007ffff576cecd in poll () from /lib64/libc.so.6 Reading in symbols for ../../binutils-gdb/gdb/event-loop.c...done. #1 0x00000000007ecc33 in gdb_wait_for_event (block=1) at ../../binutils-gdb/gdb/event-loop.c:772 #2 0x00000000007ec006 in gdb_do_one_event () at ../../binutils-gdb/gdb/event-loop.c:347 #3 0x00000000007ec03e in start_event_loop () at ../../binutils-gdb/gdb/event-loop.c:371 Reading in symbols for ../../binutils-gdb/gdb/main.c...done. #4 0x000000000086693d in captured_command_loop ( Reading in symbols for ../../binutils-gdb/gdb/exceptions.c...done. data=0x0) at ../../binutils-gdb/gdb/main.c:325 So, I am proposing this patch to simply remove this code. gdb/ChangeLog 2018-03-26 Tom Tromey <tom@tromey.com> * stack.c (backtrace_command_1): Remove verbose code.
This commit is contained in:
parent
76c939acfd
commit
675015399b
@ -1,3 +1,7 @@
|
||||
2018-03-26 Tom Tromey <tom@tromey.com>
|
||||
|
||||
* stack.c (backtrace_command_1): Remove verbose code.
|
||||
|
||||
2018-03-26 Tom Tromey <tom@tromey.com>
|
||||
|
||||
* python/py-framefilter.c (py_print_type): Don't catch
|
||||
|
18
gdb/stack.c
18
gdb/stack.c
@ -1780,24 +1780,6 @@ backtrace_command_1 (const char *count_exp, frame_filter_flags flags,
|
||||
count = -1;
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
if (info_verbose)
|
||||
{
|
||||
/* Read in symbols for all of the frames. Need to do this in a
|
||||
separate pass so that "Reading in symbols for xxx" messages
|
||||
don't screw up the appearance of the backtrace. Also if
|
||||
people have strong opinions against reading symbols for
|
||||
backtrace this may have to be an option. */
|
||||
i = count;
|
||||
for (fi = trailing; fi != NULL && i--; fi = get_prev_frame (fi))
|
||||
{
|
||||
CORE_ADDR pc;
|
||||
|
||||
QUIT;
|
||||
pc = get_frame_address_in_block (fi);
|
||||
expand_symtab_containing_pc (pc, find_pc_mapped_section (pc));
|
||||
}
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
for (i = 0, fi = trailing; fi && count--; i++, fi = get_prev_frame (fi))
|
||||
{
|
||||
QUIT;
|
||||
|
Loading…
Reference in New Issue
Block a user