From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 6899 invoked by alias); 25 Jun 2009 19:57:14 -0000 Received: (qmail 6887 invoked by uid 22791); 25 Jun 2009 19:57:10 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,J_CHICKENPOX_44,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mail.codesourcery.com (HELO mail.codesourcery.com) (65.74.133.4) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Thu, 25 Jun 2009 19:57:04 +0000 Received: (qmail 4459 invoked from network); 25 Jun 2009 19:57:01 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO orlando.local) (pedro@127.0.0.2) by mail.codesourcery.com with ESMTPA; 25 Jun 2009 19:57:01 -0000 From: Pedro Alves To: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [patch] Replace reread_symbols by load+free calls Date: Thu, 25 Jun 2009 19:57:00 -0000 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.10 Cc: Jan Kratochvil , Tom Tromey References: <8ac60eac0906101839t4d3978fyc1c6d3b3e2eccb6e@mail.gmail.com> <20090625192120.GA29930@host0.dyn.jankratochvil.net> In-Reply-To: <20090625192120.GA29930@host0.dyn.jankratochvil.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200906252058.04530.pedro@codesourcery.com> 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: 2009-06/txt/msg00686.txt.bz2 On Thursday 25 June 2009 20:21:20, Jan Kratochvil wrote: > + =A0 =A0 =A0for (so =3D master_so_list (); so !=3D NULL; so =3D so->next) > +=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0if (so->objfile =3D=3D objfile) > +=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 =A0break; > + =A0 =A0 =A0if (so !=3D NULL) > +=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0continue; > =A0 Would this work instead? if ((objfile->flags & (OBJF_SHARED | OBJF_USERLOADED) =3D=3D OBJF_SHARED)) continue; The OBJF_USERLOADED check is to take care of the windows-nat.c "dll-symbols" command... Referencing to master_so_list outside of the solib files doesn't sound right. On Thursday 25 June 2009 20:21:20, Jan Kratochvil wrote: > + /* FIXME: EXEC_BFD should be always referenced only through > + SYMFILE_OBJFILE. Currently exec_bfd exists on its own and it do= es not > + have to be listed among OBJECT_FILES. exec_bfd_mtime should eit= her be > + used or rather dropped. */ Can you elaborate on this FIXME note? exec_bfd may or not have symbols in = it. It may or not be the same bfd as symfile_objfile. Note that there are "exec-file" and "symbol-file" separate commands. In fact, I believe, historicaly, the "file" command that does both things at once was only added later. Do you plan on somehow eliminating exec_bfd? > if (reread_one) > { > + /* breakpoint_re_set gets called to comply with SYMFILE_DEFER_BP_R= ESET > + above. */ > clear_symtab_users (); I can't quite parse what this comment is really saying. Who calls breakpoint_re_set? Who is complying? --=20 Pedro Alves