Mirror of the gdb-patches mailing list
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jan Kratochvil <jan.kratochvil@redhat.com>
To: Pedro Alves <pedro@codesourcery.com>
Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org, Tom Tromey <tromey@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [patch] Fix dangling displays in separate debug
Date: Fri, 09 Apr 2010 15:53:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100409155249.GA11583@host0.dyn.jankratochvil.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <201004091634.01221.pedro@codesourcery.com>

On Fri, 09 Apr 2010 17:34:01 +0200, Pedro Alves wrote:
> On Friday 09 April 2010 16:30:14, Jan Kratochvil wrote:
> > Unaware how to improve it more.
> 
> Would using objfile_separate_debug_iterate be better?

In this case we are examining `struct expression *'.
EXP contains `struct symbol *'.
SYMBOL points to `struct objfile *' of the separate debug info file.

If SYMBOL points to `struct objfile *' of the main binary, it is equal to
SOLIB->OBJFILE and it has been already checked before.

The main binary -> separate debug info direction provided by the iterating
functionality of objfile_separate_debug_iterate is not useful in this case.


I cannot not say I like this design but its rework I have not completed to the
check-in before:
	[patch 1/8] Types GC [unloading observer]
	http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2009-05/msg00544.html
	Re: [patch 3/8] Types GC [display_uses_solib_p to exp_iterate]
	http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2009-07/msg00054.html

If continuing hacks of the current code is not acceptable it can wait till / I
can push the proper reimplementation of this code from the old thread above.



Thanks,
Jan


  reply	other threads:[~2010-04-09 15:53 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2010-04-03  9:56 Jan Kratochvil
2010-04-07 19:25 ` Tom Tromey
2010-04-09 15:30   ` Jan Kratochvil
2010-04-09 15:34     ` Pedro Alves
2010-04-09 15:53       ` Jan Kratochvil [this message]
2010-04-09 16:48         ` Pedro Alves
2010-04-09 20:01           ` Jan Kratochvil
2010-04-11  1:27             ` Pedro Alves
2010-04-19 14:25               ` Jan Kratochvil
2010-04-20 11:05                 ` Pedro Alves
2010-04-22 22:30                   ` Jan Kratochvil
2010-04-22 22:52                     ` Pedro Alves
2010-04-22 23:17                       ` Jan Kratochvil
2010-04-09 17:17       ` Tom Tromey

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=20100409155249.GA11583@host0.dyn.jankratochvil.net \
    --to=jan.kratochvil@redhat.com \
    --cc=gdb-patches@sourceware.org \
    --cc=pedro@codesourcery.com \
    --cc=tromey@redhat.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