Hi David! Thanks a lot for the explanation about the "min_dist", I figure out that the problem is in gcc optimization -O2 (Im already reporting to gcc developers) because it lose the min_dist value and because of that it's not entering in the if to fill the procedure name.
Do you know how could I read the memory address space in elf file? I'm still trying to avoid to use the address space, but I couldn't make it work yet! Thanks! On Tue, 2007-08-14 at 12:09 -0600, David Mosberger-Tang wrote: > On 8/14/07, Jose Flavio <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hi David, > > I'm already working in adding the default get_function_address to other > > archs. I was in doubt about putting a macro in elfxx other to put a > > default function in dwarf. I think that the performance that you could > > get with the macro would be minimal (if the compiler works well) and > > would maintain the code better organized if a generic function would be > > used, what do you think? > > My main concern wasn't performance, but ease-of-maintenance. I don't > think it's a good idea to litter the other arches with code that's > only used on PPC64. > > > The second point of my concern is that I need to change the: > > get_proc_name(..) in elfxx > > to add a new parameter: unw_addr_space_t as > > that I need to access the memory to read the table with function > > descriptors. > > Hmmh, can't you pick up the function descriptors from the ELF file? > Then you shouldn't need the address_space argument. > > --david -- Jose Flavio Aguilar Paulino ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) Toolchain Team LTC, Linux Technology Center IBM Brazil _______________________________________________ Libunwind-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/libunwind-devel
