Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] xenctx: misc adjustments

[Ian Jackson <Ian.Jackson@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Jan Beulich writes ("Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] xenctx: misc adjustments"):
> On 11.01.11 at 20:27, Ian Jackson <Ian.Jackson@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > Is there some reason why these shouldn't included ?  Perhaps I'm
> > misunderstanding what their purpose is.
> 
> Absolute symbols (with very few exceptions) don't represent
> addresses (take the symbol CRC values in older Linux as an
> example; current Linux has vDSO relative(!) addresses among
> them).

Thanks for the explanation.

> Since some versions have absolute _text etc, they're being
> allowed to fall into the code path following the switch
> statement (other than undefined symbols), but for the purpose
> of annotating stack traces they're useless (and in all reality, for
> relocatable kernels, there ought to be a mechanism to add a
> fixed offset to all addresses, which immediately disqualifies
> all absolute ones except those few special purpose ones).

Right.  Well I think this is a bugfix so can go in during the feature
freeze.  But ATM we're hoping for a test pass so we can 4.1.0 rc1 so
I'm going to hold off.

Thanks,
Ian.

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel