This is the mail archive of the
systemtap@sourceware.org
mailing list for the systemtap project.
Re: semantic error: not accessible at this address
- From: "Frank Ch. Eigler" <fche at redhat dot com>
- To: Vincent Bernat <bernat at luffy dot cx>
- Cc: systemtap at sourceware dot org
- Date: Sun, 29 Sep 2013 10:11:58 -0400
- Subject: Re: semantic error: not accessible at this address
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <y0mvc1mt0k7 dot fsf at fche dot csb> <8738opg9ym dot fsf at guybrush dot luffy dot cx> <20130927230432 dot GA32221 at redhat dot com> <87wqm1etsz dot fsf at guybrush dot luffy dot cx> <20130927232529 dot GB32221 at redhat dot com> <87pprtesfe dot fsf at guybrush dot luffy dot cx> <20130928000247 dot GC32221 at redhat dot com> <871u49e68v dot fsf at guybrush dot luffy dot cx> <20130928124645 dot GA17249 at redhat dot com> <m3eh88sx7b dot fsf at neo dot luffy dot cx>
Hi -
bernat wrote:
> [...]
> I have sent a proposition of patch (that works for me) but maybe you
> prefer that I go through the bugzilla?
Looks good, merged.
> I am also concerned that a global environment variable for this would be
> unsafe if you have to debug a combination of binaries compiled with and
> without -mfentry (a kernel and some userland programs). I will just
> recompile the kernel with CFLAGS=-grecord-gcc-switches. This seems
> safer.
Sure is. This environment variable knob would be just for those who
cannot recompile.
> I can also advocate to Debian and Ubuntu to use this CFLAGS for future
> kernel releases. Is there any drawback to this flag (I assume not)? Is
> it still useful when GCC version is fixed? I mean, can we assume that we
> will run in future GCC bugs and that will help to workaround them in the
> future?
I believe it is purely advantageous and worth advocating elsewhere.
- FChE