vdso handling
Alan Modra
amodra@gmail.com
Wed Mar 12 07:17:00 GMT 2014
More information about the Binutils mailing list
Wed Mar 12 07:17:00 GMT 2014
- Previous message (by thread): vdso handling
- Next message (by thread): vdso handling
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
On Mon, Mar 10, 2014 at 01:04:33PM +0000, Metzger, Markus T wrote: > I noticed that the BFD created for the VDSO (system-provided in-memory > DSO) does not contain any BFD sections. Is this intentional? Or has > there just been no need for them? [snip] > The vdso is processed in symbol_file_add_from_memory at > gdb/symfile-mem.c:84. It calls bfd_from_remote_memory to create a BFD > for the vdso and then processes it. The underlying cause is that you're trying to debug an ELF binary that only contains the execution view. The linking view (of which the sections are a part) is not loaded, so bfd_from_remote_memory does not have this information. See elfcode.h bfd_from_remote_memory. You can see similar breakage of gdb and binutils if you zap e_shoff, e_shnum, and e_shstrndx of your favourite hello world program. I suppose one way to provide something that gdb and other tools expect would be to treat the vdso like a core file, and create fake sections corresponding to the program headers. I'm not really keen on the idea though, since I know that will open up a can of worms. Can't you point gdb at a file image for the vdso? -- Alan Modra Australia Development Lab, IBM
- Previous message (by thread): vdso handling
- Next message (by thread): vdso handling
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the Binutils mailing list