From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gdb-return-10773-listarch-gdb=sourceware.cygnus.com@sources.redhat.com>
Received: (qmail 4582 invoked by alias); 10 Oct 2002 19:06:15 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gdb-subscribe@sources.redhat.com>
List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/gdb/>
List-Post: <mailto:gdb@sources.redhat.com>
List-Help: <mailto:gdb-help@sources.redhat.com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender: gdb-owner@sources.redhat.com
Received: (qmail 4497 invoked from network); 10 Oct 2002 19:06:13 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (66.187.233.31)
  by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 10 Oct 2002 19:06:13 -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 g9AIkHX25249
	for <gdb@sources.redhat.com>; Thu, 10 Oct 2002 14:46:17 -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 g9AJ6Cf20190;
	Thu, 10 Oct 2002 15:06:12 -0400
Received: from localhost.localdomain (vpn50-65.rdu.redhat.com [172.16.50.65])
	by pobox.corp.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g9AJ6Ba16934;
	Thu, 10 Oct 2002 15:06:12 -0400
Received: (from kev@localhost)
	by localhost.localdomain (8.11.6/8.11.6) id g9AJ66m11732;
	Thu, 10 Oct 2002 12:06:06 -0700
Date: Thu, 10 Oct 2002 12:06:00 -0000
From: Kevin Buettner <kevinb@redhat.com>
Message-Id: <1021010190606.ZM11731@localhost.localdomain>
In-Reply-To: Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@mvista.com>
        "i386-linux signal backtraces broken" (Oct 10,  2:47pm)
References: <20021010184739.GA15971@nevyn.them.org>
To: Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@mvista.com>, gdb@sources.redhat.com
Subject: Re: i386-linux signal backtraces broken
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-SW-Source: 2002-10/txt/msg00097.txt.bz2

On Oct 10,  2:47pm, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:

> We have two choices, that I see:
>   - Call the code inspection functions always
>   - Call the code inspection functions if the name is sigaction, taking
>     advantage of the glibc implementation detail that sigaction is the
>     only exported name for this function that I can see, and they are
>     implemented right after it in the same file.
> 
> Option (A) is a performance hit.  Option (B) is, well, a little fragile.
> 
> Thoughts?

It sounds to me like option (A) is the way to go.  How bad is the
performance hit?

Kevin