On Tue, Jun 18, 2019 at 09:18:13PM +0000, Kamil Rytarowski wrote: > Module Name: src > Committed By: kamil > Date: Tue Jun 18 21:18:13 UTC 2019 > > Modified Files: > src/sys/arch/aarch64/include: ptrace.h > src/sys/arch/alpha/include: ptrace.h > src/sys/arch/amd64/include: ptrace.h > src/sys/arch/arm/include: ptrace.h > src/sys/arch/hppa/include: ptrace.h > src/sys/arch/i386/include: ptrace.h > src/sys/arch/ia64/include: ptrace.h > src/sys/arch/m68k/include: ptrace.h > src/sys/arch/mips/include: ptrace.h > src/sys/arch/or1k/include: ptrace.h > src/sys/arch/powerpc/include: ptrace.h > src/sys/arch/riscv/include: ptrace.h > src/sys/arch/sh3/include: ptrace.h > src/sys/arch/sparc/include: ptrace.h > src/sys/arch/vax/include: ptrace.h > > Log Message: > Introduce PTRACE_REG_FP() a helper macro to retrieve the frame pointer > > The macro is dummy for ia64 (the FP register is unknown and can change > freely) and sparc/sparc64 (not stored in struct reg).
Wouldn't it be better not to declare PTRACE_REG_FP for the cases where obtaining it is more complicated? e.g. someone who hasn't seen this commit and wants to use PTRACE_REG_FP thinks that they can just use it, and until they specifically test ia64 and sparc64 they won't know it doesn't behave correctly.
