From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 6097 invoked by alias); 9 Oct 2003 22:46:56 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 5845 invoked from network); 9 Oct 2003 22:46:51 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (66.187.233.31) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 9 Oct 2003 22:46:51 -0000 Received: from int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (int-mx1.corp.redhat.com [172.16.52.254]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h99MkoM17474 for ; Thu, 9 Oct 2003 18:46:50 -0400 Received: from pobox.corp.redhat.com (pobox.corp.redhat.com [172.16.52.156]) by int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h99Mkoc09271; Thu, 9 Oct 2003 18:46:50 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain (vpn50-39.rdu.redhat.com [172.16.50.39]) by pobox.corp.redhat.com (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id h99MkmdT011941; Thu, 9 Oct 2003 18:46:48 -0400 Received: (from kev@localhost) by localhost.localdomain (8.11.6/8.11.6) id h99Mkhb14877; Thu, 9 Oct 2003 15:46:43 -0700 Date: Thu, 09 Oct 2003 22:46:00 -0000 From: Kevin Buettner Message-Id: <1031009224642.ZM14876@localhost.localdomain> In-Reply-To: Roland McGrath "Re: unwind support for Linux 2.6 vsyscall DSO" (Oct 9, 3:32pm) References: <200310092232.h99MWK8r013186@magilla.sf.frob.com> To: Roland McGrath , Kevin Buettner Subject: Re: unwind support for Linux 2.6 vsyscall DSO Cc: Daniel Jacobowitz , Jim Blandy , Elena Zannoni , gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-SW-Source: 2003-10/txt/msg00328.txt.bz2 On Oct 9, 3:32pm, Roland McGrath wrote: > It will appear in the dynamic linker's list of objects, but will not have a > file name. (Actually, a bogus patch from Dan went into glibc that makes it > report its soname as file name, but I'm fixing that.) The file name in > l_name will be an empty string. (With the broken glibc of the moment, it > reports "linux-gate.so.1", a file that exists nowhere and never will.) Is there any reason there couldn't be a /proc/PID entry for this file? (My apologies if this has already been discussed ad nauseum. I haven't really been paying attention up 'til now.) > There is no way for you to associate this record with the implicit DSO. > All the information you have is the (empty) name and an l_addr of zero > (because the kernel-supplied DSO is effectively "prelinked" to its address). > So, I think that will not actually interfere since it will appear to be > some bogon. Okay. Kevin