Re: [Libunwind-devel] Power Libunwind

[Jose Flavio Aguilar Paulino]

Hi David!

Its very good to have power main stream!
Now I will do more complex tests and maybe incremental fixes!

The only last problem is that you didnt run autoconf and automake, or
didnt have removed Makefile.in, /src/Makefile.in and /tests/Makefile.in

If you could do that and commit this files, I would be glad!

Thanks,
Flavio

On Thu, 2007-08-02 at 10:01 -0600, David Mosberger-Tang wrote:
> Jose,
> 
> This patch looks good to me.  I merged it and pushed it into the git
> tree.  I only did a build on x86 so no real testing on my end, but I
> figured you were eager to see it in GIT so we can start doing
> incremental fixes. ;-) 
> 
> Documentation updates are definitely welcome, too!
> 
> Please let me know if you see any issues.
> 
> Thanks!
> 
>   --david
> 
> On 8/2/07, Jose Flavio Aguilar Paulino <address@hidden> wrote:
>         Well, if the symbol has the the address of the function
>         pointer, it is 
>         not a problem, I removed all get_function_address!
>         
>         Well, remember to do autoconf and automake.
>         And if possible, in libunwind page write this build
>         instructions:
>         CC='gcc -m64 -maltivec' ../libunwind/configure && make -j2 
>         
>         regards,
>         Flávio
>         
>         
>         On Thu, 2007-08-02 at 07:27 -0600, David Mosberger-Tang wrote:
>         > On 8/2/07, Jose Flavio Aguilar Paulino <address@hidden>
>         wrote: 
>         >         because when the symbol is a function, and you are
>         looking for
>         >         it, we
>         >         have the following:
>         >         val = sym->st_value;
>         >
>         >         but, in Power (I don't know how it works in IA64),
>         this value 
>         >         would be
>         >         the address of entry in the table, not the address
>         of the
>         >         symbol, so the
>         >         look up will fail.
>         >
>         > Why is that a problem?  On ia64, we also return the address
>         of the 
>         > function descriptor.  That *is* the value of a function
>         pointer, after
>         > all.  I guess I'm still not following.
>         >
>         >
>         >
>         >   --david
>         > --
>         > Mosberger Consulting LLC,
>         http://www.mosberger-consulting.com/
>         
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Mosberger Consulting LLC, http://www.mosberger-consulting.com/