This is the mail archive of the
systemtap@sourceware.org
mailing list for the systemtap project.
[Bug translator/10454] Raw number statement probes won't work without dwarf info
- From: "jistone at redhat dot com" <sourceware-bugzilla at sourceware dot org>
- To: systemtap at sources dot redhat dot com
- Date: 8 Sep 2009 21:15:14 -0000
- Subject: [Bug translator/10454] Raw number statement probes won't work without dwarf info
- References: <20090728133231.10454.mjw@redhat.com>
- Reply-to: sourceware-bugzilla at sourceware dot org
------- Additional Comments From jistone at redhat dot com 2009-09-08 21:15 -------
(In reply to comment #11)
> (b)
> implementing the documented but nonexistent process(*).statement(NUM).absolute
> probe point
I think this is the better choice. It does exist already for process(PID), as
documented, just not for process(NAME). Because of relocations, allowing NAME
has a high potential to do the wrong thing, especially if NAME is a system library.
Roland suggested that the address might be interpreted as relative to the
relocated module base. I think that's would be more useful, though perhaps that
semantic should be under ".relative".
--
http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10454
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.