From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 29816 invoked by alias); 30 Nov 2006 21:54:55 -0000 Received: (qmail 29806 invoked by uid 22791); 30 Nov 2006 21:54:54 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mx2.palmsource.com (HELO mx2.palmsource.com) (12.7.175.14) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Thu, 30 Nov 2006 21:54:47 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost.domain.tld (Postfix) with ESMTP id 24688102C02; Thu, 30 Nov 2006 13:54:46 -0800 (PST) Received: from mx2.palmsource.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mx2.palmsource.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id 14278-01-84; Thu, 30 Nov 2006 13:54:45 -0800 (PST) Received: from ussunex01.palmsource.com (unknown [192.168.101.9]) by mx2.palmsource.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0B1C6102A37; Thu, 30 Nov 2006 13:54:45 -0800 (PST) Received: from 192.168.92.189 ([192.168.92.189]) by ussunex01.palmsource.com ([192.168.101.9]) via Exchange Front-End Server owa.palmsource.com ([10.0.20.17]) with Microsoft Exchange Server HTTP-DAV ; Thu, 30 Nov 2006 21:54:44 +0000 Received: from svmsnyderlnx by owa.palmsource.com; 30 Nov 2006 13:54:44 -0800 Subject: Re: [PATCH] gdb script performance From: Michael Snyder To: Jean-Marc Saffroy Cc: Jim Blandy , gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Thu, 30 Nov 2006 21:54:00 -0000 Message-Id: <1164923684.14460.17.camel@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.4.1 X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2006-11/txt/msg00422.txt.bz2 On Thu, 2006-11-30 at 14:18 +0100, Jean-Marc Saffroy wrote: > On Wed, 29 Nov 2006, Jim Blandy wrote: > > > When the user changes the symbol file (or when GDB notices it has > > changed and automatically re-reads it), the section and symtab objects > > your static variables are pointing to will be freed. If you then get a > > spurious cache hit, you'll hand out a pointer to garbage. So you'll > > need to invalidate the cache whenever the section or symtab get freed. > > Yes, that's what I meant when I said that hooks for invalidating the > caches are missing, but I haven't looked yet where they should be added. > > BTW I don't know if the test suite would catch this; if not, a test should > probably be added. A test would be a good idea, yes. BTW, I think you have a worthwhile idea here, and I hope you continue to refine it. There are some serious performance issues in gdb. Michael