From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 15771 invoked by alias); 12 Nov 2007 15:45:46 -0000 Received: (qmail 15755 invoked by uid 22791); 12 Nov 2007 15:45:46 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from NaN.false.org (HELO nan.false.org) (208.75.86.248) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Mon, 12 Nov 2007 15:45:28 +0000 Received: from nan.false.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by nan.false.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 497DE9835E; Mon, 12 Nov 2007 15:45:26 +0000 (GMT) Received: from caradoc.them.org (22.svnf5.xdsl.nauticom.net [209.195.183.55]) by nan.false.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D3726980A5; Mon, 12 Nov 2007 15:45:25 +0000 (GMT) Received: from drow by caradoc.them.org with local (Exim 4.68) (envelope-from ) id 1IrbTY-0004jr-IH; Mon, 12 Nov 2007 10:45:24 -0500 Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2007 15:45:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: Ulrich Weigand Cc: Alan Modra , binutils@sourceware.org, gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [rfc, v3] Fix ELF synthetic symbol size bug (affects PPC64) Message-ID: <20071112154524.GA18162@caradoc.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: Ulrich Weigand , Alan Modra , binutils@sourceware.org, gdb-patches@sourceware.org References: <20071112032907.GF13318@bubble.grove.modra.org> <200711121537.lACFbTkm017005@d12av02.megacenter.de.ibm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200711121537.lACFbTkm017005@d12av02.megacenter.de.ibm.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.15 (2007-04-09) X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2007-11/txt/msg00230.txt.bz2 On Mon, Nov 12, 2007 at 04:37:29PM +0100, Ulrich Weigand wrote: > Thanks, Alan. The following version of the patch has only the ppc64 > binutils part, and uses the udata.p setting in GDB only if it is not > NULL. This fixes the ppc64 problem as well (and has no regressions > on ppc32 either). > > This still will not give us size information for PLT stubs, but I > guess that could still be added at some later time ... > > Any additional comments on this approach? Not from me; it seems fine. -- Daniel Jacobowitz CodeSourcery