Page MenuHomeFreeBSD

readelf: use table-based DT_FLAGS and DT_FLAGS_1 decoding
ClosedPublic

Authored by emaste on Feb 1 2019, 3:09 PM.
Tags
None
Referenced Files
F168739332: D19053.id.diff
Sat, Aug 29, 9:55 PM
Unknown Object (File)
Wed, Aug 26, 5:18 PM
Unknown Object (File)
Tue, Aug 25, 10:57 AM
Unknown Object (File)
Tue, Aug 25, 8:58 AM
Unknown Object (File)
Wed, Aug 12, 1:17 PM
Unknown Object (File)
Sat, Aug 8, 6:15 PM
Unknown Object (File)
Sat, Aug 8, 12:00 PM
Unknown Object (File)
Jul 27 2026, 10:10 PM
Subscribers

Details

Diff Detail

Repository
rS FreeBSD src repository - subversion
Lint
Lint Not Applicable
Unit
Tests Not Applicable

Event Timeline

brooks added a subscriber: brooks.

LGTM

contrib/elftoolchain/readelf/readelf.c
2741 ↗(On Diff #53509)

Would this make more sense to the user as something like:

printf(" unknown(0x%jx)", (uintmax_t)val);
This revision is now accepted and ready to land.Feb 1 2019, 6:18 PM
kib added inline comments.
contrib/elftoolchain/readelf/readelf.c
2736 ↗(On Diff #53509)

This is weird, why not do &= ~ ?

2741 ↗(On Diff #53509)

It would make more sense to print each unknown flag individually. At least I do find it more useful, from my experience with the Intel CPUID bits and DMAR capabilities reports.

This revision was automatically updated to reflect the committed changes.
contrib/elftoolchain/readelf/readelf.c
2741 ↗(On Diff #53509)

Not a bad idea, I will keep it in mind for a followup