https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109719
Christian Hergert changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |INVALID
Status|WAITING
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109719
--- Comment #8 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Christian Hergert from comment #6)
> (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #2)
> > HUH? omit frame pointer is on by default on x86_64.
>
> Yes, Fedora 38 changed the default compiler flags to
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109719
--- Comment #7 from Christian Hergert ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #3)
> Also on x86_64, frame pointers are not required by the ABI so this is not an
> ABI issue. Why instead are you not using the dwarf2 unwind tables that are
> g
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109719
--- Comment #6 from Christian Hergert ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #2)
> HUH? omit frame pointer is on by default on x86_64.
Yes, Fedora 38 changed the default compiler flags to `-fno-omit-frame-pointer`
so that the system can be
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109719
--- Comment #5 from Christian Hergert ---
Created attachment 54985
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=54985&action=edit
First level of stack traces with g++
This shows stack traces when the only change was compiling harfbuzz w
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109719
--- Comment #4 from Christian Hergert ---
Created attachment 54984
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=54984&action=edit
First level of stack traces with clang++
This shows a more proper first-level of stack frames within the p
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109719
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
Also on x86_64, frame pointers are not required by the ABI so this is not an
ABI issue. Why instead are you not using the dwarf2 unwind tables that are
generated by default too?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109719
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2023-05-03
Status|UNCONFIRM
