Re: [PATCH] Implement new `info core mappings' command

[Jan Kratochvil <jan.kratochvil@redhat.com>]

On Tue, 08 Nov 2011 02:48:54 +0100, Sergio Durigan Junior wrote:
> >> +      if (bitness == 32)
> >> +	printf_filtered ("\t%#10lx %#10lx %#10x %7s\n",
> >> +			 start,
> >> +			 end,
> >> +			 (int) size,
> >> +			 filename ? filename : "");
> >
> > Could you print all the info readelf -Wa prints?  I would use rather readelf
> > to see the protection bits, also I guess the file size vs. mem size may
> > suggest if it is a data segment or code segment, up to you how to display it,
> > even some indicator "from core file" (memsize==filesize) vs. "from local file"
> > (filesize==0) vs. "partial" (others, e.g. filesize==0x1000) could be
> > enough.
> 
> When you say "all the info", what do you mean?  I am not sure I
> understood your sentence above.

Currently you display:
          Start Addr           End Addr       Size objfile
        0x37aa200000       0x37aa222000    0x22000 /lib64/ld-2.14.90.so
FYI max width:
  0xffffffffffffffff 0xffffffffffffffff

I see now the formatstring is a copy from `info proc mappings'.

The readelf -Wl output is:
  Type           Offset   VirtAddr           PhysAddr           FileSiz  MemSiz   Flg Align
  LOAD           0xa6c000 0x00007f9623a5b000 0x0000000000000000 0x001000 0x015000 R E 0x1000

Flg must be there.  It suggests whether that part is about segment with .text
or with .data etc.

Somehow both FileSiz MemSiz should be there.  I would find OK (this is RFC) to
put there just MemSiz together with single-character column:
	C if FileSiz == MemSiz
	I if FileSiz == pagesize (that is only the build-id header is present)
	F if FileSiz == 0
	? otherwise
But not sure if one gets used to this format.

It is questionable whether Offset should be there.  I use that value but
probably when one starts editing/searching etc. corefile one can run separate
readelf anyway and it would be just redundant in the GDB output.  So I do not
want Offset there.

32:
    printf_filtered ("\t%#10lx %#10lx %#10x %7s\n",
I think \t should be removed, screen width is scarce.
%7s should be %s.

64:
    printf_filtered ("  %#18lx %#18lx %#10x %7s\n",
I think "  " should be removed, screen width is scarce.
%7s should be %s.

Feel free to disagree, this is more about bikeshedding, just expressing my
opinions with reasons for discussion.


Thanks,
Jan