https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25803
Nick Clifton <nickc at redhat dot com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|REOPENED |RESOLVED
Resolution|--- |FIXED
--- Comment #28 from Nick Clifton <nickc at redhat dot com> ---
(In reply to gagan singh sidhu (gagz, broly, w/e u want) from comment #27)
> if you don’t mind, would you allow me to mail you in the future to learn
> about how exactly you pinpointed the issue?
You can - although there is no need to just email me - you can ask here, or on
the binutils mailing list: binut...@sourceware.org.
Anyway to answer your question, I basically followed my standard bug
locating/fixing procedure which is:
1. Reproduce the problem. [This was actually the hardest step]
2. Add print statements to the code to find out what is wrong.
[Other people use debuggers, but I am old school].
3. Generate possible fixes based on the knowledge of what is wrong.
4. Test them out.
In this particular case I replaced the assertion that was being triggered with
a series of printf()s telling me about the symbols that were causing the
problems. I then followed several blind alleys assuming that the symbols
should not have been there and trying to find out why. Eventually however I
was able to prove to my satisfaction that the higher level code was correct and
that the symbols were indeed dynamic symbols. So then I looked more closely at
them, saw their similar looking names, and hence created my post about "what is
special about these clock symbols". Digging deeper I eventually noticed that
they were all IFUNC symbols and then is when the penny dropped.
Cheers
Nick
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
