Hi, Kazu and Arun 在 2020年09月25日 00:00, crash-utility-requ...@redhat.com 写道: > Send Crash-utility mailing list submissions to > crash-utility@redhat.com > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/crash-utility > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > crash-utility-requ...@redhat.com > > You can reach the person managing the list at > crash-utility-ow...@redhat.com > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific > than "Re: Contents of Crash-utility digest..." > > > Today's Topics: > > 1. [PATCH] Fix for failure when using extensions on PPC64 target > x86_64 binary (HAGIO KAZUHITO (?????)) > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Message: 1 > Date: Thu, 24 Sep 2020 08:16:06 +0000 > From: HAGIO KAZUHITO(?????) <k-hagio...@nec.com> > To: "Discussion list for crash utility usage, maintenance and > development" <crash-utility@redhat.com> > Subject: [Crash-utility] [PATCH] Fix for failure when using extensions > on PPC64 target x86_64 binary > Message-ID: > > <osbpr01mb1991b1b7cd686fbc72827e2bdd...@osbpr01mb1991.jpnprd01.prod.outlook.com> > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-2022-jp" > > Without the patch, the "extend" command on an x86_64 binary that can > be used to analyze ppc64le dumpfiles fails with the error meesage > "extend: <path to extension>: not an ELF format object". > > Suggested-by: Arun Easi <aeasi.li...@gmail.com> > Signed-off-by: Kazuhito Hagio <k-hagio...@nec.com> > --- > I'm not sure which tag I should use in this case, so if you want > me to use another one e.g. Signed-off-by, please let me know. > > symbols.c | 3 ++- > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/symbols.c b/symbols.c > index d22fb1d9bdd1..603946db4f34 100644 > --- a/symbols.c > +++ b/symbols.c > @@ -3868,7 +3868,8 @@ is_shared_object(char *file) > break; > > case EM_X86_64: > - if (machine_type("X86_64") || machine_type("ARM64")) > + if (machine_type("X86_64") || machine_type("ARM64") || > + machine_type("PPC64"))
For the other architectures such as S390, IA64, etc, is it possible to occur the similar problems on an x86_64 host? Or no one uses it like this? Thanks. Lianbo > return TRUE; > break; > > -- Crash-utility mailing list Crash-utility@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/crash-utility
