From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 18763 invoked by alias); 18 Feb 2013 15:54:24 -0000 Received: (qmail 18682 invoked by uid 22791); 18 Feb 2013 15:54:19 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.2 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,KHOP_RCVD_UNTRUST,KHOP_SPAMHAUS_DROP,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_W,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Mon, 18 Feb 2013 15:54:09 +0000 Received: from int-mx02.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx02.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.12]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id r1IFDwA7004500 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Mon, 18 Feb 2013 10:13:58 -0500 Received: from host2.jankratochvil.net (ovpn-116-18.ams2.redhat.com [10.36.116.18]) by int-mx02.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id r1IFDs8a019001 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Mon, 18 Feb 2013 10:13:56 -0500 Date: Mon, 18 Feb 2013 15:54:00 -0000 From: Jan Kratochvil To: "Metzger, Markus T" Cc: Eli Zaretskii , "gdb-patches@sourceware.org" , "markus.t.metzger@gmail.com" Subject: Re: [rfc 6/8] record disas: omit function names by default Message-ID: <20130218151353.GA14121@host2.jankratochvil.net> References: <20130215161049.GA6219@host2.jankratochvil.net> <831uchtp4y.fsf@gnu.org> <20130215183256.GA16845@host2.jankratochvil.net> <83sj4xs8hp.fsf@gnu.org> <20130215190955.GA18269@host2.jankratochvil.net> <20130218130247.GA7250@host2.jankratochvil.net> <20130218141311.GA9315@host2.jankratochvil.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) 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: 2013-02/txt/msg00460.txt.bz2 On Mon, 18 Feb 2013 15:50:50 +0100, Metzger, Markus T wrote: > This goes beyond what "btrace" did and has the potential for lots of discussions - > especially when considering optimized code. GDB currently has many issues with optimized code where it could behave better (even for watchpoints etc.). It is enough when the feature is useful for "-O0 -g" code. > It might be better if we postponed it in favor of reverse-stepping, OK, fine with that, so that neither "btrace list" nor "record list" will exist, in the favor of "reverse-step". > but I wanted it > to be considered when we're discussing the new "record" commands to avoid that > we call what I called "record backtrace" "record list" and thus don't have an appropriate > name left for such a source listing command. OK. I still find "record list-functions" and "record list-instructions" more clear than "record backtrace" and "record disassemble". Particularly as there is the "list" word. Sorry for "bikeshedding" it, additionally so late, I do not want to keep this discussion longer anymore. Thanks, Jan