From: Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@false.org>
To: Paul Koning <pkoning@equallogic.com>
Cc: kevinb@redhat.com, gdb@sources.redhat.com
Subject: Re: enable_break() in solib-svr4.c
Date: Wed, 31 Aug 2005 21:20:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20050831211958.GA20405@nevyn.them.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <17174.7612.800418.769197@gargle.gargle.HOWL>
On Wed, Aug 31, 2005 at 05:14:36PM -0400, Paul Koning wrote:
> No, it's the same issue, materializing in a second place.
>
> The same conclusion applies as before: either NetBSD is wrong -- it
> should use the bizarre and unintuitive meaning of "base address" that
> appears to be intended by the document you quoted -- or NetBSD is
> right, "base address" means "the address where the thing ended up"
> (which is the intuitive definition) and GDB is wrong in several
> places.
>
> The reason I'm picking on the meaning of "base address" is that
> "address" normally means a place, not a difference. If people mean
> difference, the normal term used is "offset" or "displacement" or
> something like that. So I find it hard to believe that "base address"
> is meant to be a difference between two addresses.
I didn't check the thread to see what the "quoted document" was, but
this is from the ELF gABI:
Because position-independent code uses relative addressing between
segments, the difference between virtual addresses in memory must match
the difference between virtual addresses in the file. The difference
between the virtual address of any segment in memory and the
corresponding virtual address in the file is thus a single constant
value for any one executable or shared object in a given process. This
difference is the base address.
It really doesn't get any clearer than that.
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery, LLC
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2005-08-31 21:20 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2005-08-15 20:21 Paul Koning
2005-08-15 20:59 ` Mark Kettenis
2005-08-31 20:31 ` Kevin Buettner
2005-08-31 21:14 ` Paul Koning
2005-08-31 21:20 ` Daniel Jacobowitz [this message]
2005-08-31 21:40 ` Paul Koning
2005-08-31 21:19 ` Mark Kettenis
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20050831211958.GA20405@nevyn.them.org \
--to=drow@false.org \
--cc=gdb@sources.redhat.com \
--cc=kevinb@redhat.com \
--cc=pkoning@equallogic.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).