From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andrew Cagney To: "H . J . Lu" Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.cygnus.com Subject: Re: A new revised patch for dlclose Date: Sat, 01 Apr 2000 00:00:00 -0000 Message-id: <38C7C7C7.CD90829D@cygnus.com> References: <20000307120800.A27315@valinux.com> <20000307122129.A3568@valinux.com> X-SW-Source: 2000-q1/msg00626.html "H . J . Lu" wrote: > > On Tue, Mar 07, 2000 at 12:08:00PM -0800, H . J . Lu wrote: > > Here is a revised patch for dlclose. If you take a look at the > > dynamic linker in glibc 2.1 or above, you will find that it informs > > gdb about loading/unloading a shared library via an internal debug > > function, _dl_debug_state (). gdb already handles the loading in > > handle_inferior_event () with BPSTAT_WHAT_CHECK_SHLIBS and > > BPSTAT_WHAT_CHECK_SHLIBS_RESUME_FROM_HOOK. However, we need also > > check the unloading event. solib_verify () will be called only when the > > dynamic linker calls _dl_debug_state (). It shouldn't introduce any > > overhead. I believe it is on the right track although it may be further > > optimized. H.J., I'm curious. Who is Sam Lantinga, they don't show up in GDB's copyright assignment file. Andrew >From rodneybrown@pmsc.com Sat Apr 01 00:00:00 2000 From: "Brown, Rodney" To: "'Andrew Cagney'" Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.cygnus.com Subject: RE: 000215 some warning removal Date: Sat, 01 Apr 2000 00:00:00 -0000 Message-id: <9150F3E779F0D211BD370008C733141C38AADD@aus-msg-02.au.pmsc.com> X-SW-Source: 2000-q1/msg00241.html Content-length: 927 Title: RE: 000215 some warning removal Using gcc-2.95.2 with the default configury, => -Wall you get warning: missing initializer warning: (near initization for `memory_read_packet_config.size') Give the use of these ones it's of doubtfull benefit. For bfd/som.c you get deluged by warnings > Rodney Brown wrote: > > > --- gdb/remote.c.orig   Wed Feb  9 19:52:47 2000 > > +++ gdb/remote.c        Thu Feb 17 16:18:46 2000 > > @@ -425,6 +425,8 @@ > >  static struct memory_packet_config memory_write_packet_config = > >  { > >    "memory-write-packet-size", > > +  0L, > > +  0 > >  }; > > > >  static void > > @@ -448,6 +450,8 @@ > >  static struct memory_packet_config memory_read_packet_config = > >  { > >    "memory-read-packet-size", > > +  0L, > > +  0 > >  }; > > > >  static void > > Um, these have me puzzled. Are complete initializers required? > >       Andrew >