Mark Wielaard <[email protected]> writes: > On Mon, 2014-05-12 at 16:36 +0200, Petr Machata wrote: >> I see it now. So correct me if I'm wrong, but that means that after the >> first dwfl_report_elf, dwfl_nextcu would iterate over just that one >> module. However after second dwfl_report_elf, dwfl_nextcu would again >> iterate over the first module, as well as the second module. >> >> If that's correct, then I believe what we should store at struct library >> is Dwfl_Module, not Dwfl itself. > > Yes, that seems correct. dwfl_report_elf does report the Dwfl_Module (or > NULL on failure). So you can use that and dwfl_module_nextcu.
Dima, I think you should be able to verify whether the second dwfl_nextcu iterates over the first module's data as well. While that's probably harmless, it's a work duplication, and a better design would be to store Dwfl_Module at struct library and use dwfl_module_nextcu as indicated above. Thanks, PM _______________________________________________ Ltrace-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ltrace-devel
