From owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG  Tue Nov 11 22:52:59 2014
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org
 [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1])
 (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 454D940B;
 Tue, 11 Nov 2014 22:52:59 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from citadel.icyb.net.ua (citadel.icyb.net.ua [212.40.38.140])
 by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 47879ADF;
 Tue, 11 Nov 2014 22:52:54 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from porto.starpoint.kiev.ua (porto-e.starpoint.kiev.ua
 [212.40.38.100])
 by citadel.icyb.net.ua (8.8.8p3/ICyb-2.3exp) with ESMTP id AAA18712;
 Wed, 12 Nov 2014 00:54:39 +0200 (EET) (envelope-from avg@FreeBSD.org)
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1])
 by porto.starpoint.kiev.ua with esmtp (Exim 4.34 (FreeBSD))
 id 1XoKIo-000JGo-1P; Wed, 12 Nov 2014 00:52:46 +0200
Message-ID: <5462930B.7060907@FreeBSD.org>
Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2014 14:51:55 -0800
From: Andriy Gapon <avg@FreeBSD.org>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.3; WOW64;
 rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.2.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Rui Paulo <rpaulo@me.com>, Shrikanth Kamath <shrikanth07@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: DTrace: stack() does not print kernel module functions for i386
References: <CAEOAkMXnwqC42gZKc0f80cppff077pYGjs5PUPht0DBcyEi8Jw@mail.gmail.com>
 <20141109093632.GV53947@kib.kiev.ua>
 <9011F920-3092-4E61-9CDC-68FD9092BB7D@me.com>
 <CAEOAkMVGMOFFcXvFwY9AmW_ZdtUeGVJa13g-1iWZRTXN3inG5Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <8BE54531-7E0B-492E-ACE2-27E9F5F3C0BA@me.com>
In-Reply-To: <8BE54531-7E0B-492E-ACE2-27E9F5F3C0BA@me.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: Konstantin Belousov <kostikbel@gmail.com>, freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.org,
 freebsd-dtrace@FreeBSD.org
X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18-1
Precedence: list
List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD
 <freebsd-hackers.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/options/freebsd-hackers>, 
 <mailto:freebsd-hackers-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-hackers/>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-hackers-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers>,
 <mailto:freebsd-hackers-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2014 22:52:59 -0000

On 10/11/2014 09:52, Rui Paulo wrote:
> On Nov 9, 2014, at 23:06, Shrikanth Kamath <shrikanth07@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Thanks Konstantin/Rui, I did pull up this thread
>> https://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-amd64/2010-June/013034.html
>> where it was discussed, should I file a bug report?
> 
> Yes, please file a bug report.
> 
>> In any case I was
>> trying to clarify that whether ET_DYN or ET_REL the offset adjustment
>> needs to be done true or not?
> 
> Regarding the thread you pointed out... Maybe Andriy can clarify if he already worked on this before.

As I recall (and the mentioned thread seems to confirm it) I encountered
the problem on amd64 and I fixed it there.  I never knew that there was
any problem like that on other platforms including i386.
This is the first time I hear about that.  So, obviously I did not do
any work or any testing on other platforms.
Please feel free to test and fix.

-- 
Andriy Gapon