On Tue, 11 Dec 2012 11:13:37 +0100, Mark Wielaard wrote: > I don't think dwfl_module_addrsym () really has anything to do with the > ppc64 ABI
That is in fact the whole question to IBM, whether it has or has not. > since all it does is resolve an address to a symbol in a table > we happen to have at hand (how is libdwfl specific, and it happens to be > the function descriptor in the case of ppc64 in some cases, with the > st_value adjusted). That symbol has a particular name that we just > return. You might want to ask about how backtraces on ppc64 should print > (function) names, but IMHO that is separate from the string that > dwfl_module_addrsym () happens to return. I do not agree with the paragraph above for the reasons already discussed before. But without resolving it yet I ask a different question to get more a picture how your solution may work: If elfutils had name -> address resolver (still without DWARF capability) which address should be resolved for "raise"? Should be ".raise" also resolved? Thanks, Jan _______________________________________________ elfutils-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/elfutils-devel
