From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-wr1-x441.google.com (mail-wr1-x441.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::441]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A59C03870855 for ; Thu, 14 May 2020 22:39:27 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 sourceware.org A59C03870855 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=embecosm.com Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=andrew.burgess@embecosm.com Received: by mail-wr1-x441.google.com with SMTP id e16so947498wra.7 for ; Thu, 14 May 2020 15:39:27 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=embecosm.com; s=google; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=s0t1ok+/vKMZG18JhixTkfKVuUo90dTmjNxwU792QUM=; b=Mt3NfW3x4UKBzzX+Blj/qmRgxvqWeCR/eYBpiu+z+4pV+fD9xrmGs1BRzlrdv6fRh0 hMA91Pze0Go+KxvitsPWyUJipBldUNYfsBh0D30TVkL4rcUos9BcprzGFyD/Po0Fljzv cshc15zTZ1MWsrRIe9lZBvD0Ak3kSVliYiv2vIvxjwChwGz2bCnqOCNGA8TlgJn1q77O /+iHJaPUiQgD12uZbEkQHxQn7idvKzTeWeuZmCzBizTnxJeLPwXD8YnBQISfBh8UPE4c J7m4e4H+qV6SAD462YCFWwViuzDdUQwPoiK3l0+gcld7JKw7DGSLpoBUBfGpZbQR5OXa fc2w== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=s0t1ok+/vKMZG18JhixTkfKVuUo90dTmjNxwU792QUM=; b=clHQJUwQPwLFV0FR3TgtCAuv6KBmAlVfYsZzQ+R3kNiDq8tfbcriyIqk0LvbmFJXtX 8LHyZwRY83DVfrhwJVANVOE/VDCVhyBe/ozqZEur5J4O1PK0+93DD8yihL8elhX3z6oE CI7NqS3rt/BZCA05TAV/o9mHXevHpWqQrG0BAijfve6VGeLeFIyGFls6wb8PlqqmwcSv amigWD9Hnxe/iW5WdD1U3GIciEwYrHHvBkTweOo5Gini6KN8qxkrTkmKT9UevSThSOaa 6WcfIcUovuoyYPMVwNnZL4EhdRWvRtghhauRMD0K9BZLoVcY5dZoe6Lfg+Sxq17INCMM l9yQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM5312wwK2RdyJDSmEM1fWq12EtVdVPAOKnwU0h8iS139Anr/HYSUU 66zSi/FfmjYaM7ztZjXGusO+/Akpo04= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyyPfF9OaazkGGsxlJ9yg7RMLy0JjirLgCms0YusZbeAYTGWy4LFV/dHiqmxHUuNopDSyT/Og== X-Received: by 2002:adf:a51a:: with SMTP id i26mr694463wrb.332.1589495966778; Thu, 14 May 2020 15:39:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (host86-128-12-16.range86-128.btcentralplus.com. [86.128.12.16]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id r11sm762350wma.35.2020.05.14.15.39.25 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Thu, 14 May 2020 15:39:26 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 14 May 2020 23:39:25 +0100 From: Andrew Burgess To: Tom Tromey Cc: Bernd Edlinger , gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] gdb: Preserve is-stmt lines when switch between files Message-ID: <20200514223925.GS3522@embecosm.com> References: <6e9b21a0002164cec014dfe4d94d816a376989b4.1585952198.git.andrew.burgess@embecosm.com> <20200414112841.GC2366@embecosm.com> <20200416171809.GJ2366@embecosm.com> <87lfmnql4g.fsf@tromey.com> <20200427103418.GF3522@embecosm.com> <87r1vmuv6j.fsf@tromey.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <87r1vmuv6j.fsf@tromey.com> X-Operating-System: Linux/5.5.17-200.fc31.x86_64 (x86_64) X-Uptime: 23:37:18 up 24 days, 12:22, X-Editor: GNU Emacs [ http://www.gnu.org/software/emacs ] X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, DKIM_VALID_EF, RCVD_IN_BARRACUDACENTRAL, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE, SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS, TXREP autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on server2.sourceware.org X-BeenThere: gdb-patches@sourceware.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Gdb-patches mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 14 May 2020 22:39:38 -0000 * Tom Tromey [2020-05-14 14:18:44 -0600]: > >>>>> "Andrew" == Andrew Burgess writes: > > Resurrecting this again ... we have some internal tests that have been > failing, and I want to land at least one of these patches to resolve > this. > > Andrew> After reading[2] I'd also be interest to understand what flaw in > Andrew> DWARF you feel makes a difference in this case. > > I also don't understand this. > > Andrew> I think it is great Bernd, that you are reaching out from the GCC > Andrew> community to engage with GDB, this is certainly the best way to ensure > Andrew> that we can work together as communities to give the best possible > Andrew> debug experience, and I'm sorry you feel that I have not been clear > Andrew> enough about the issues I'm seeing here. > > +1 > > Andrew> I don't know how we address this without merging your patch, > Andrew> releasing GDB and seeing how it works in the wild. However, if we > Andrew> did decide to "just try it", I would still prefer we staged things > Andrew> as: > Andrew> (a) Merge my patch, targeted regression fix, then > Andrew> (b) Your patch, new functionality GCC/DWARF ranges work around. > Andrew> In this way, if we end up backing out some or all of (b) we still > Andrew> have (a) in place that fixes the regression. I'm more than happy > Andrew> for a rebase of (b) in include full removal of (a). > > I think landing your patch is safe to do while we discuss part (b). > How about we move forward with that part? Then if we come to agreement > on where the bug lies we can decide about that. I agree. I already rebased this and retested it. Unless someone shouts out between now and tomorrow I plan to merge my patch. Bernd (or anyone else) - I'm more than happy that if a better patch is put forward it can revert some or all of my patch, as needed. Like Tom, I'd like to see the regressions squashed. Thanks, Andrew