This is the mail archive of the systemtap@sourceware.org mailing list for the systemtap project.

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format:	[Raw text]

Re: Line numbers reported by pp() do not respond to the reality

From: "Frank Ch. Eigler" <fche at redhat dot com>
To: Tim Beaulen <tbscope at gmail dot com>
Cc: systemtap at sources dot redhat dot com
Date: Mon, 6 Sep 2010 08:18:39 -0400
Subject: Re: Line numbers reported by pp() do not respond to the reality
References: <AANLkTikQ-_YW2huZQJiHPmU8nmqUoSMcOQJLKNW5EuWD@mail.gmail.com> <y0mvd6kxrqt.fsf@fche.csb> <AANLkTikrUn+-rgJuZG+CLp2ms9BCDs6Lgd31NK-Ah5=_@mail.gmail.com> <AANLkTik357g_jkbmTNddtFTLy-M_2Oa+NTY97CBAeyiG@mail.gmail.com>

Hi -

> I tried without optimising and everything is correct.

OK, but ...

> I know this is basic knowledge, I'm learning it by doing and making mistakes.
> Sorry for the noise.

Not at all.  I don't think this represents pilot error.  Tools like
systemtap are meant to opeate in the face of optimized, deployed
applications, not just -O0 -g ones.  It would be good to fully
understand the phenomenon here.

To that end, would you be able to share the .i file, and the object
file in question with and without -O*, along with exact gcc version
data?


- FChE

Follow-Ups:
- Re: Line numbers reported by pp() do not respond to the reality
  - From: Tim Beaulen

References:
- Line numbers reported by pp() do not respond to the reality
  - From: Tim Beaulen
- Re: Line numbers reported by pp() do not respond to the reality
  - From: Frank Ch. Eigler
- Re: Line numbers reported by pp() do not respond to the reality
  - From: Tim Beaulen
- Re: Line numbers reported by pp() do not respond to the reality
  - From: Tim Beaulen

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]