This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the libstdc++ project.
Re: RFC: add some static probes to libstdc++
- From: Jonathan Wakely <jwakely dot gcc at gmail dot com>
- To: Tom Tromey <tromey at redhat dot com>
- Cc: "libstdc++" <libstdc++ at gcc dot gnu dot org>, Jakub Jelinek <jakub at redhat dot com>, Dave Korn <dave dot korn dot cygwin at gmail dot com>, gcc-patches <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: Tue, 9 Apr 2013 19:47:58 +0100
- Subject: Re: RFC: add some static probes to libstdc++
- References: <87sj4hzap2 dot fsf at fleche dot redhat dot com> <512F4E5C dot 8050400 at gmail dot com> <87a9qozc7h dot fsf at fleche dot redhat dot com> <20130315085546 dot GK12913 at tucnak dot redhat dot com> <CAH6eHdSHGMU4MZVcbq1k6FCkh7R90a3DNJSjamEhMSW57di-gw at mail dot gmail dot com> <alpine dot DEB dot 2 dot 02 dot 1304021735380 dot 21244 at stedding dot saclay dot inria dot fr> <CAH6eHdSDe9Cfw1VVURfVb-M1qYyQ1VQtA1AT=+NebRpLXFYG1A at mail dot gmail dot com> <87zjx7ppdl dot fsf at fleche dot redhat dot com>
On 9 April 2013 18:47, Tom Tromey wrote:
>>>>>> "Jonathan" == Jonathan Wakely <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> Marc> I thought you were going to suggest enhancing the configure test
> Marc> so it fails on old systemtap (detects it as absent).
> Jonathan> Ah yes, that's a much better idea!
> Here's a patch to do that.
> I tested it on x86-64 Fedora 18. I tested the "failing" path by using
> an old sdt.h. This required a number of iterations to ensure that the
> test failed for the right reasons.
Ah yes, tricky.
> Ok? I think it should go on the 4.8 branch as well.
OK for trunk and 4.8, thanks.