On Sun, Oct 4, 2015 at 10:30 PM, Keno Fischer <[email protected]> wrote: > Bump, does this patch look reasonable?
Yes - looks reasonable to me. Wonder why it wasn't a problem for other LLVM JIT users (eg: pyston?). > unw_dyn_remote_table_t, but I think you meant to say "Like REMOTE_TABLE, but ..". Perhaps call it IP_OFFSET instead of TABLE2? + if (di->format == UNW_INFO_FORMAT_REMOTE_TABLE || + di->format == UNW_INFO_FORMAT_REMOTE_TABLE2) Could you wrap this in is_remote_table()? > + ip_base = segbase; Rename it something neutral that works for both the segbase and ip_base cases? -Arun _______________________________________________ Libunwind-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/libunwind-devel
