From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 26053 invoked by alias); 8 Sep 2009 21:15:32 -0000 Received: (qmail 25177 invoked by uid 48); 8 Sep 2009 21:15:14 -0000 Date: Tue, 08 Sep 2009 21:15:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20090908211514.25176.qmail@sourceware.org> From: "jistone at redhat dot com" To: systemtap@sources.redhat.com In-Reply-To: <20090728133231.10454.mjw@redhat.com> References: <20090728133231.10454.mjw@redhat.com> Reply-To: sourceware-bugzilla@sourceware.org Subject: [Bug translator/10454] Raw number statement probes won't work without dwarf info X-Bugzilla-Reason: AssignedTo Mailing-List: contact systemtap-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: systemtap-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2009-q3/txt/msg00620.txt.bz2 ------- Additional Comments From jistone at redhat dot com 2009-09-08 21:15 ------- (In reply to comment #11) > (b) > implementing the documented but nonexistent process(*).statement(NUM).absolute > probe point I think this is the better choice. It does exist already for process(PID), as documented, just not for process(NAME). Because of relocations, allowing NAME has a high potential to do the wrong thing, especially if NAME is a system library. Roland suggested that the address might be interpreted as relative to the relocated module base. I think that's would be more useful, though perhaps that semantic should be under ".relative". -- http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10454 ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.