On Mon, 27 Feb 2017 14:45:37 -0800 David Daney <ddaney@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 02/27/2017 02:36 PM, Steven Rostedt wrote: > > On Mon, 27 Feb 2017 14:21:21 -0800 > > David Daney <ddaney@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > >> See attached for mips. It seems to do the right thing. > >> > >> I leave it as an exercise to the reader to fix the other architectures. > >> > >> Consult your own binutils experts to verify that what I say is true. > > > > It may still just be safer to do the pointers instead. That way we > > don't need to worry about some strange arch or off by one binutils > > messing it up. > > Obviously it is your choice, but this is bog standard ELF linking. In > theory even the arrays of power-of-2 sized objects should also supply an > entity size. Think __ex_table and its ilk. > > > The benefit of supplying an entsize is that you don't have to change the > structure of the existing code and risk breaking something in the process. I agree that this may be the better answer. The issue tracepoints had is that they were defined in C with a "section" attribute. I'm not sure you can pass various section attributes via a gcc section attribute. -- Steve
