From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 62307 invoked by alias); 2 May 2019 07:26:48 -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 62299 invoked by uid 89); 2 May 2019 07:26:48 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-3.9 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SPF_HELO_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 spammy=reproduced, HX-Languages-Length:1782 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 ESMTP; Thu, 02 May 2019 07:26:46 +0000 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx01.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.11]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B4DE7308FC4D; Thu, 2 May 2019 07:26:45 +0000 (UTC) Received: from f29-4.lan (ovpn-116-84.phx2.redhat.com [10.3.116.84]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 72A1763F73; Thu, 2 May 2019 07:26:45 +0000 (UTC) Date: Thu, 02 May 2019 07:26:00 -0000 From: Kevin Buettner To: Eli Zaretskii Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org, Simon Marchi Subject: Re: The 'cold' function attribute and GDB Message-ID: <20190502002644.5e40b489@f29-4.lan> In-Reply-To: References: <83wojaovbp.fsf@gnu.org> <077aee8c-7bef-bad6-a6a1-e69f116cc18b@simark.ca> <20190501195113.69aea752@f30-4.lan> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2019-05/txt/msg00032.txt.bz2 On Thu, 02 May 2019 09:58:47 +0300 Eli Zaretskii wrote: > On May 2, 2019 5:51:13 AM GMT+03:00, Kevin Buettner wrote: > > On Wed, 1 May 2019 16:17:04 -0400 > > Simon Marchi wrote: > > > > Also, which commit of GDB is this with? I recall some patches > > related to non-contiguous > > > address ranges not too long ago. > > > > As I recall, I committed the non-contiguous address range stuff in > > late August of 2018. It might be the case that 8.3 will be the first > > release to include that support. Any build based on a commit to > > master since 2018-08-24 should have this support. > > The non-contiguous address ranges support seems to target > specifically the disassembly command? This does display 2 separate > address ranges, both in GDB 8.2 and in the latest pretest of 8.3. > But were those changes supposed to teach backtrace and stack frame > reporting in general about multiple ranges? Because in that case > GDB needs to solve the inverse problem: go from the address to the > symbol. There were four distinct problems that my non-contiguous address range patch set addressed. As you say, one of them was disassembly of functions with discontiguous ranges. But that work also addressed problems with stepping, with breakpoint placement, and with display of addresses. A brief discussion of these matters can be found here: https://www.sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2018-08/msg00541.html It's possible that more needs to be done with display of addresses. I'll need to look at it more closely to know for sure. It would help me if there were a relatively small test case to look at. (It would help even more if it could be reproduced on a GNU/Linux system.) Kevin