From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 24396 invoked by alias); 15 Jul 2003 17:14:55 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 24386 invoked from network); 15 Jul 2003 17:14:51 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO localhost.redhat.com) (66.30.197.194) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 15 Jul 2003 17:14:51 -0000 Received: from redhat.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 39F452B7F; Tue, 15 Jul 2003 13:14:50 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <3F14368A.9040902@redhat.com> Date: Tue, 15 Jul 2003 17:14:00 -0000 From: Andrew Cagney User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; NetBSD macppc; en-US; rv:1.0.2) Gecko/20030223 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Daniel Jacobowitz Cc: Mark Kettenis , gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [RFC/RFA] Per-objfile data mechanism References: <200307131717.h6DHH425098569@elgar.kettenis.dyndns.org> <20030715161729.GA32437@nevyn.them.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2003-07/txt/msg00293.txt.bz2 > On Sun, Jul 13, 2003 at 07:17:04PM +0200, Mark Kettenis wrote: > >> This patch adds a per-objfile data mechanism to GDB, and uses that to >> store DWARF2 frame info instead of abusing objfile->sym_private. The >> latter could lead to problems on certain platforms according to >> Daniel. > > > Cygwin appears to be affected by this, so we should definitely reach > some conclusion before 6.0. > > >> Comments? OK to check this in? Do we want this on the release branch >> too? > > > The concept is nice, but I share David's concern. The way you > implemented this, every objfile always pays the cost of the extra > storage; there's an abstraction benefit, but a memory and simplicity > penalty. I could go either way. Some how, I don't see a per-object file penalty being a problem :-) Andrew