Vincent Guffens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> I have the idea that another array for the symbols is not required. I >> think we can use one common table. The symbol name and symbol address >> are already in there. The hard thing is would getting the size, >> perhaps we could leave that open and fill it in with a function, or >> can we use a ld/gcc feature to do that? This will make the backtrace >> code simpler and it saves memory. Do you think that is somehow >> possible? > > This is true, another list of symbols is not required for this > backtrace support but it makes the implementation a lot less > intrusive. It would be possible to use some #ifdef here and there > around the structures that are used already to add a field for the > symbol size but it would not be very nice. If you turn the debug flag > off, the code comes back to the original so I thought it would not be > a problem.
It won't be that many ifdefs. I think that would be better than yet another table. > However, I found using a simple example that using -O2 still allows > for using the frame pointer. This is to be verified but if it turns to > be usable, than maybe using the --enable-debug will be less a problem > and more popular so it would then be wise not to have the kernel > symbol list twice. What do you think ? Right, I think -O2 is not a problem if you do not show line numbers. But if you show line numbers -O2 is not always accurate AFAIK because gcc can reorder lines. > To correct the rest, I think I will read the GCS in detail. Cool! Thanks, Marco _______________________________________________ Grub-devel mailing list Grub-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/grub-devel
