Re: [RFC] Share the shared library list between inferiors

Pedro Alves
2008-11-03T15:05:16Z

On Monday 03 November 2008 14:29:20, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 27, 2008 at 11:29:04PM +0000, Pedro Alves wrote:
> > There are several ways to skin this cat. This one seemed like
> > the smallest, most extensible and malleable one from GDB's side, because
> > it doesn't cast to stone any new protocol extension --- which may
> > prove limited to some systems (some memory regions shared, others not;
> > some shared but visible at different addresses in different
> > inferiors/cores, etc.). I was hoping we'd cross that bridge when
> > we start seeing those systems reporting multi process support
> > to GDB.
> >
> > What do people think about this?
>
> I have one request. Could you expand the comment to mention the other
> properties you're associating with this flag?
>
> Global breakpoints and a single common target description don't
> obviously follow from "global shared library list".

Certainly! Sorry about that. That came from the fact that feature
implementation having had several dressings over time, and I guess
I had just started seeing through the name.

I could also rename the gdbarch method to something like
gdbarch_code_is_shared_between_processes, if you'd like (although
it sounds a bit long of a name).

--
Pedro Alves