From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Luck, Tony" Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2002 19:03:42 +0000 Subject: [Linux-ia64] RE: Fixing /proc/kcore Message-Id: List-Id: References: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org Andi Kleen wrote: > On Fri, Oct 25, 2002 at 02:14:44PM -0700, Luck, Tony wrote: > > Putting everything into the vmlist looks to be a good idea. Perhaps > > there should be an entry for the "direct addresses" too? > > Yes that would make sense. > > > > > So what does: > > > > # objdump -p /proc/kcore > > > > look like for you? > > Very messy because of the negative addresses and still some sign problems > in binutils :-) Oops, I didn't mean to take this discussion off the mailing list. What about a combined approach ... architecture dependent code should add all the interesting stuff to the vmlist, so kcore just needs to walk the list to cover everything. We could also keep the KCORE_BASE concept from my patch, but turn it into a variable that the architecture dependent code can set to some suitable offset to keep all the offsets in /proc/kcore positive. This will avoid having to fixup binutils (at least until someone comes up with an architecture where kernel space scatters across a wide enough range that we can't keep the offsets positive). -Tony