From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 950 invoked by alias); 12 Aug 2004 13:16:24 -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 935 invoked from network); 12 Aug 2004 13:16:23 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (66.187.233.31) by sourceware.org with SMTP; 12 Aug 2004 13:16:23 -0000 Received: from int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (int-mx1.corp.redhat.com [172.16.52.254]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i7CDGNe3004555 for ; Thu, 12 Aug 2004 09:16:23 -0400 Received: from localhost.redhat.com (porkchop.devel.redhat.com [172.16.58.2]) by int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id i7CDGIa18330; Thu, 12 Aug 2004 09:16:18 -0400 Received: from gnu.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 083D82B9D; Thu, 12 Aug 2004 09:16:13 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <411B6D9C.7020702@gnu.org> Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 13:16:00 -0000 From: Andrew Cagney User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; NetBSD macppc; en-GB; rv:1.4.1) Gecko/20040801 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Daniel Jacobowitz Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: New observer objfile_mapped; was ... References: <41191D71.60204@redhat.com> <7494-Wed11Aug2004070352+0300-eliz@gnu.org> <411A4209.6020801@redhat.com> <411A5012.3000508@gnu.org> <9743-Wed11Aug2004205531+0300-eliz@gnu.org> <411A84B0.7020106@gnu.org> <20040811204658.GA7231@nevyn.them.org> <411A9B5B.1080108@gnu.org> <20040812125801.GB10224@nevyn.them.org> In-Reply-To: <20040812125801.GB10224@nevyn.them.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2004-08/txt/msg00457.txt.bz2 >>> Think PIE. > > > I am, in fact, thinking about pie. Oh, you mean PIE... > > >>> For our purposes, both new executable loaded and new shlib loaded are >>> the same event - there's been an objfile_loaded event. There's no >>> reason to differentiate them. >>> >>> The new inferior event is orthogonal, and far more low level. > > > I don't see how "new inferior" is any lower level than "new object". At the time of inferior_created, nothing, zero zip is known about the inferior. Things like the objfile loader and the shlib loader hang off of it. > In any case, thread-db wants to initialize when these two conditions > are true: > (A) The inferior is running > and > (B) The thread library has been loaded > > So using an inferior created hook makes perfect sense to me... We're comparing: -> inferior_created -> thread-db -> solib loaded -> objfile mapped -> thread-db with -> inferior_created -> objfile mapped -> thread-db -> shlib loaded -> objfile mapped -> thread-db thread-db only needs to know when objfiles have been mapped in. Andrew