From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 9941 invoked by alias); 22 Apr 2002 15:25:00 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 9925 invoked from network); 22 Apr 2002 15:24:56 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO cygnus.com) (205.180.83.203) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 22 Apr 2002 15:24:56 -0000 Received: from romulus.sfbay.redhat.com (romulus.sfbay.redhat.com [172.16.27.251]) by runyon.cygnus.com (8.8.7-cygnus/8.8.7) with ESMTP id IAA25118; Mon, 22 Apr 2002 08:24:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from kev@localhost) by romulus.sfbay.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) id g3MFOnj01374; Mon, 22 Apr 2002 08:24:49 -0700 Date: Mon, 22 Apr 2002 08:25:00 -0000 From: Kevin Buettner Message-Id: <1020422152449.ZM1373@localhost.localdomain> In-Reply-To: "David S. Miller" "multi-arch TODO" (Apr 22, 4:09am) References: <20020422.040949.16307644.davem@redhat.com> To: "David S. Miller" , gdb@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: multi-arch TODO MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-SW-Source: 2002-04/txt/msg00362.txt.bz2 On Apr 22, 4:09am, David S. Miller wrote: > SOFUN_ADDRESS_MAYBE_MISSING - Gross hack time... some compilation > environments don't fill in N_FUN/N_SO stabs, you have to compute > them by hand by looking up function names in the symbol table and > so forth. > > Much confusion in this area, some Linux targets define this, some > not. All Solaris targets define it, but that makes sense based upon > the commentary around the changes this macro define protects. > > Why don't all Linux targets define this? Do some binutils ports > perform this optimization and others not? Or was there some bug > in N_FUN/N_SO stabs in binutils and/or gcc that this is papering > around? kevinb@cyghat.com is the one who added this to powerpc > and i386 Linux. I haven't given it a lot of thought recently, but my opinion is that the SOFUN_ADDRESS_MAYBE_MISSING code ought to be enabled everywhere. The only downside that I can think of is that we lose the ability to put a symbol at address 0. Kevin