Hi Lianbo,
-----Original Message-----
> > Date: Thu, 24 Sep 2020 08:16:06 +0000
> > From: HAGIO KAZUHITO(?????) <k-hagio-ab@xxxxxxx>
> > To: "Discussion list for crash utility usage, maintenance and
> > development" <crash-utility@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > Subject: [PATCH] Fix for failure when using extensions
> > on PPC64 target x86_64 binary
> > Message-ID:
> > <OSBPR01MB1991B1B7CD686FBC72827E2BDD390@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >
> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-2022-jp"
> >
> > Without the patch, the "extend" command on an x86_64 binary that can
> > be used to analyze ppc64le dumpfiles fails with the error meesage
> > "extend: <path to extension>: not an ELF format object".
> >
> > Suggested-by: Arun Easi <aeasi.linux@xxxxxxxxx>
> > Signed-off-by: Kazuhito Hagio <k-hagio-ab@xxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > I'm not sure which tag I should use in this case, so if you want
> > me to use another one e.g. Signed-off-by, please let me know.
> >
> > symbols.c | 3 ++-
> > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/symbols.c b/symbols.c
> > index d22fb1d9bdd1..603946db4f34 100644
> > --- a/symbols.c
> > +++ b/symbols.c
> > @@ -3868,7 +3868,8 @@ is_shared_object(char *file)
> > break;
> >
> > case EM_X86_64:
> > - if (machine_type("X86_64") || machine_type("ARM64"))
> > + if (machine_type("X86_64") || machine_type("ARM64") ||
> > + machine_type("PPC64"))
>
> For the other architectures such as S390, IA64, etc, is it possible to occur
> the similar problems on an x86_64 host? Or no one uses it like this?
No, as you know, these are the architectures that x86_64 binary can analyze.
Please see README and configure.c. They will be completed by this patch,
I think.
Thanks,
Kazu
--
Crash-utility mailing list
Crash-utility@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/crash-utility
