[Bug translator/10454] Raw number statement probes won't work without dwarf info

[jistone at redhat dot com]

------- 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.