|
From: Konstantin S. <kon...@gm...> - 2009-02-06 13:47:36
|
On Fri, Feb 6, 2009 at 4:45 PM, Tom Hughes <to...@co...> wrote: > Konstantin Serebryany wrote: > >> Just checking: the mechanism used to get stack traces in exp-ptrcheck >> will *not* be confused by such hand-written assembly, right? > > Of course it will. To start with we only have one piece of code for getting > stack traces, and that is used everywhere. Plus if we had a magic way to get > the stack trace in one place we'd use it in all the other places as well... exp-ptrcheck has it's own stack trace machinery. (right, Julian?) It does not unwind the stack, instead it tracks each call/return (roughly speaking). ThreadSanitizer does the same. --kcc > > Tom > > -- > Tom Hughes (to...@co...) > http://www.compton.nu/ > |