Mirror of the gdb-patches mailing list
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@false.org>
To: Tom Tromey <tromey@redhat.com>
Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org, Vladimir Prus <vladimir@codesourcery.com>
Subject: Re: Value reference counting
Date: Fri, 17 Jul 2009 19:25:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090717190418.GA9041@caradoc.them.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <m3bpnj5ef3.fsf@fleche.redhat.com>

On Fri, Jul 17, 2009 at 12:53:52PM -0600, Tom Tromey wrote:
> This will work fine for Python.  Also, I think that this model is
> clearer than what I did.
> 
> It seems to me that at this point, release_value is doing a walk of a
> linked list for no particular benefit.  Suppose we deleted release_value
> and replaced all calls to it with calls to value_incref?
> 
> This might result in some values living slightly longer than they
> otherwise would have (they will live until free_all_values, whereas
> currently they will be deleted at value_free time, which might or might
> not be sooner).
> 
> The only thing I could think of is whether this would affect watchpoint
> operation, since IIUC the watchpoint code examines all_values.  But, if
> this problem exists, it could be worked around by examining the
> reference count of values on the chain.
> 
> What do you think?

I had a good reason this would leak values for watchpoints, but now I
can't get it to work out.  Still, it makes me nervous.

free_all_values can have a very long interval.  But it looks like
breakpoint commands always run it, so not unbounded user behavior.
What about breakpoint conditions?  Is anything released and free'd
during a condition check going to linger until we stop?

-- 
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery


  reply	other threads:[~2009-07-17 19:04 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2009-07-17 19:03 Daniel Jacobowitz
2009-07-17 19:04 ` Tom Tromey
2009-07-17 19:25   ` Daniel Jacobowitz [this message]
2009-07-17 22:55     ` Tom Tromey
2009-07-20 13:30     ` Thiago Jung Bauermann
2009-07-20 13:34       ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2009-07-20 14:57         ` Thiago Jung Bauermann
2009-07-20 17:34       ` Tom Tromey
2009-07-20 19:45         ` Thiago Jung Bauermann
2009-07-20  9:55 ` Vladimir Prus
2009-07-20 13:40   ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2009-07-20 15:08     ` Vladimir Prus
2009-07-21 18:18 ` Daniel Jacobowitz

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20090717190418.GA9041@caradoc.them.org \
    --to=drow@false.org \
    --cc=gdb-patches@sourceware.org \
    --cc=tromey@redhat.com \
    --cc=vladimir@codesourcery.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox