Re: pending patches ping

[Mark Wielaard <mjw at redhat dot com>]

On Wed, 2013-01-23 at 22:13 +0100, Jan Kratochvil wrote:
> Hi Mark,
> 
> Re: [patch] Implement reglocs for s390/s390x
> https://lists.fedorahosted.org/pipermail/elfutils-devel/2012-October/002715.html
> Message-ID: <20121014155013.GA5525@host2.jankratochvil.net>

I admit to be a little lost in the review thread. But it seems to me
this could be split up between formatting changes (like the \n, b, B
readelf.c one) and the actual s390_corenote.c change. Would it be
possible to post this as separate patches (and maybe even split off the
test addition if that depends on the formatting)?

> Re: [patch] Fix 64-bit->32-bit vDSO reporting
> https://lists.fedorahosted.org/pipermail/elfutils-devel/2012-October/002704.html
> Message-ID: <20121012150900.GA24645@host2.jankratochvil.net>

I think this one is fine. Though I admit that I found the first less
efficient version a bit easier to understand. Could add a comment in the
code to explain when/why the valid32/64 heuristic works/doesn't work and
that it is there to prevent having to open pid/exe in normal cases?

> [patchv3] Fix dwfl_report_elf BASE alignment
> https://lists.fedorahosted.org/pipermail/elfutils-devel/2012-November/002759.html
> Message-ID: <20121116161051.GA2042@host2.jankratochvil.net>

The actual change is very small:

--- a/libdwfl/dwfl_report_elf.c
+++ b/libdwfl/dwfl_report_elf.c
@@ -181,8 +181,6 @@ __libdwfl_report_elf (Dwfl *dwfl, const char *name, const char *file_name,
 	    {
 	      vaddr = ph->p_vaddr & -ph->p_align;
 	      address_sync = ph->p_vaddr + ph->p_memsz;
-	      if ((base & (ph->p_align - 1)) != 0)
-		base = (base + ph->p_align - 1) & -ph->p_align;
 	      start = base + vaddr;
 	      break;
 	    }

But I don't fully understand this code so will have to lookup the references you gave first.

> All of the patches may be out of sync (at least due to ChangeLogs).  I would
> like to know which ones / in which order to rebase, I was already rebasing
> some in the past.

I am just going (very slowly) through them in the order you listed them.
If you like the reviews in another order please just post rebased
patches to the list.

Thanks,

Mark