Hi Milian, On Wed, 2017-03-29 at 16:50 +0200, Milian Wolff wrote: > would you be willing to accept a patch that adds an alternative to > dwfl_attach_state taking an Ebl pointer instead of the Elf* to guess the > architecture from?
I rather not expose an Ebl handle to the public interface. It is really an internal interface that we can change anytime. There is also no way a user can create or get at an Ebl handle using the public interfaces. > This would simplify the code for cases where we know the architecture, but > don't necessarily have a corresponding Elf* at hand (yet). If there'd be a > version that takes the Ebl pointer directly, one could use e.g. > ebl_openbackend_emulation or _machine to find the backend handle for the > known > target architecture directly. > > If this would be acceptable, I will write a patch up for this. I would need > suggestions for a fitting name though, in C++ I'd simply use an overload but > here with plain C... ;-) Would it help your use case if there was a dwfl_init_state (Dwfl *dwfl, int e_machine, unsigned char ei_class, unsigned char ei_data, ...)? And what exactly is your use case? Maybe we can come up with a better interface. Thanks, Mark
