From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 24114 invoked by alias); 19 Jan 2011 20:49:28 -0000 Received: (qmail 24105 invoked by uid 22791); 19 Jan 2011 20:49:27 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mail.codesourcery.com (HELO mail.codesourcery.com) (38.113.113.100) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Wed, 19 Jan 2011 20:49:20 +0000 Received: (qmail 19234 invoked from network); 19 Jan 2011 20:49:19 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO scottsdale.localnet) (pedro@127.0.0.2) by mail.codesourcery.com with ESMTPA; 19 Jan 2011 20:49:19 -0000 From: Pedro Alves To: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [patch] Add tests for JIT debugging interface Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2011 21:04:00 -0000 User-Agent: KMail/1.13.5 (Linux/2.6.35-24-generic; KDE/4.5.1; x86_64; ; ) Cc: Paul Pluzhnikov , Yao Qi References: <20110111232641.AE3D5190C55@elbrus2.mtv.corp.google.com> <201101191203.35101.pedro@codesourcery.com> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <201101191349.16542.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: 2011-01/txt/msg00411.txt.bz2 On Wednesday 19 January 2011 12:26:34, Paul Pluzhnikov wrote: > On Wed, Jan 19, 2011 at 11:03 AM, Pedro Alves > > It's output from infrun.c:normal_stop. Sounds like a bug somewhere. > > It is a bug. Fix in progress... > > >> That's alright -- I was going to fix this area (see "JIT interface > >> slowness" in gdb@sourceware.org list), and this isn't the only problem > >> -- I also noticed that we leak several jit_breakpoints on rerun. > > That leak is in fact causing the bug above ... Ah. Patch is okay. As general principle, I'd rather fix the leak first and avoid introducing new failures against gdbserver if possible and easy, but if you want to check this in already, that'll be okay too. -- Pedro Alves