Hi Dave,
This patch try to extend your technologie in list to struct.
cmd_struct() is modified.
cmd_union() and cmd_pointer() should also be modified.
Do we really have to clone cmd_struct() in these alternatives ?
Why not make so that cmd_struct(), cmd_union() and cmd_pointer() do call a
common function accepting some flags?
Olivier
struct struct_name address | symbol <- unchanged
struct struct_name <-unchanged
struct struct_name -o <- unchanged
New and the main goal
crash> struct task_struct.pid,tgid f6044560
pid = 3533,
tgid = 3533,
Also new and in the main goal
crash> ps 1
PID PPID CPU TASK ST %MEM VSZ RSS COMM
1 0 0 f7e8caa0 IN 0.0 1744 644 init
crash> task_struct.children f7e8caa0
children = {
next = 0xf7e8c0d0,
prev = 0xc1f060d0
},
crash> struct task_struct.pid,tgid -l task_struct.sibling 0xf7e8c0d0
pid = 2,
tgid = 2,
New (acceptable side effect)
crash> struct task_struct.pid,tgid
struct task_struct {
[152] pid_t pid;
}
struct task_struct {
[156] pid_t tgid;
}
struct struc_name array counter <- unchanged
New (acceptable side effect)
crash> struct task_struct.pid,tgid f6044560 3
pid = 3533,
pid = 2850,
pid = -167489336,
tgid = 3533,
tgid = 2850,
tgid = -167489412,
Attachment:
struct.patch
Description: Binary data
-- Crash-utility mailing list Crash-utility@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/crash-utility
