From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 62652 invoked by alias); 12 Aug 2015 10:38:35 -0000 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 Received: (qmail 62643 invoked by uid 89); 12 Aug 2015 10:38:35 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.5 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,KAM_LAZY_DOMAIN_SECURITY,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS autolearn=no version=3.3.2 X-HELO: mx1.redhat.com Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with (AES256-GCM-SHA384 encrypted) ESMTPS; Wed, 12 Aug 2015 10:38:34 +0000 Received: from int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.22]) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2E55336AA39; Wed, 12 Aug 2015 10:38:33 +0000 (UTC) Received: from blade.nx (ovpn-116-40.ams2.redhat.com [10.36.116.40]) by int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id t7CAcVFX004418; Wed, 12 Aug 2015 06:38:32 -0400 Received: by blade.nx (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 270102643BC; Wed, 12 Aug 2015 11:38:31 +0100 (BST) Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2015 10:38:00 -0000 From: Gary Benson To: Pedro Alves Cc: Joel Brobecker , Doug Evans , Jan Kratochvil , gdb-patches , Sandra Loosemore , =?iso-8859-1?Q?Andr=E9_P=F6nitz?= , Paul Koning Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] Better handling of slow remote transfers Message-ID: <20150812103831.GA12792@blade.nx> References: <001a11c301b0388ac5051d0c5ab8@google.com> <20150811185519.GA28644@host1.jankratochvil.net> <20150811195943.GC22245@adacore.com> <20150812094831.GD11096@blade.nx> <55CB1B8D.6010501@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <55CB1B8D.6010501@redhat.com> X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2015-08/txt/msg00270.txt.bz2 Pedro Alves wrote: > On 08/12/2015 10:48 AM, Gary Benson wrote: > > Joel Brobecker wrote: > > > > At any rate, I think the default behaviour for 7.10 has to be > > > > the default behaviour of 7.9 (given that, for example, we're > > > > not going to make file transfer more adequately interruptible > > > > for 7.10). > > > > > > That makes sense to me. > > > > If we are to reset the default sysroot to "" then please > > consider the series I posted that added the auto-target-prefix > > functionality: > > > > https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2015-07/msg00828.html > > I'd really prefer not adding magic at the last minute to the 7.10 > release. That would leave no breathing space to sort out further > design mistakes, which I'm sure we'll trip on. The only real "magic" that series adds is this: + if (target_filesystem_is_local ()) ... + else if (auto_target_prefix && *gdb_sysroot == '\0') + { + /* Set the absolute prefix to "target:" for executable files + and for shared libraries whose executable filename has a + "target:"-prefix. */ + if (!is_solib + || (exec_filename != NULL + && is_target_filename (exec_filename))) + { + sysroot = xstrdup (TARGET_FILENAME_PREFIX); + make_cleanup (xfree, sysroot); + } + } *If* it proves to be a problem then we can deprecate the set/show auto-target-prefix boolean. It seems like you're saying this series is a big change, but it's really not: the core of it is that little snippet of logic, which is easy enough to reason about: IF target filesystem is remote AND auto_target_prefix is enabled AND no sysroot is set AND (we're looking for an executable OR we're looking for a solib loaded by a target-prefixed executable): Prefix the filename with "target:" It's certainly way less invasive a change than making transfers interruptible would be. > I think we need to unblock 7.10 as soon as possible so that 7.11 > with all the neat sysroot features happens sooner too. :-) Sure, but why not unblock it this way so that 7.10 users can have the neat sysroot features, *if and only if* they use GDB in a way that didn't make sense in 7.9? Thanks, Gary -- http://gbenson.net/