Mirror of the gdb-patches mailing list
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Keith Seitz <keiths@redhat.com>
To: "gdb-patches@sourceware.org ml" <gdb-patches@sourceware.org>
Subject: [RFA 0/5] Explicit linespecs
Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2012 03:45:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <50120ECF.4020709@redhat.com> (raw)

Hi,

For some time now, I've been toying with mi/13139, which is a feature 
request for "explicit linespecs" -- linespecs which bypass the linespec 
parser. This might provide some relief for very large applications where 
linespec can get egregiously slow.

To cut to the chase, they may be used by either CLI or MI right now. 
For the CLI, the generic syntax is:

-source XXX
-function XXX
-label XXX
-offset XXX
-address XXX

The option names may be truncated, e.g., "break -s XX -func YY".

One of the side effects of this patchset is that ALL linespecs (for 
breakpoints) are converted to explicit after parsing.

I've chosen to implement this as an extension to the breakpoint API. 
That is, I've added (yet another) parameter to create_breakpoint and 
several internal breakpoint functions.

This patch is split into five smaller patches:

1) els-refactor-linespec-parsing.patch : This patch may be applied 
independently of other patches. It refactors some code in linespec.c to 
facilitate sharing of code.

2) els-breakpoint-api.patch : This patch does all the mechanical work of 
adding the new explicit linespec parameter to the required breakpoint 
API functions and updates all callers. This patch is also a nop and may 
be applied independently of the others.

3) els-explicit-linespecs.patch : This is the patch where the real work 
of explicit linespecs is done, including CLI/MI lexing/parsing functions.

4) els-tests.patch : New test suite additions for the feature.

5) els-doc.patch : Documentation changes for the new feature.

While patches 1 & 2 may be applied independently, I am not advocating 
that approach. I consider this patchset all-or-nothing.

Patch #3 must be applied /after/ #2. While a bit inconvenient, I thought 
it nicer to separate the huge mechanical change in #2 from the real guts 
of the patch, which is #3. I apologize if this aggravates anyone.

I have tested the patchset on x86_64-linux native and native-gdbserver, 
and all patches are regression-free with --enable-targets=all.

Keith


             reply	other threads:[~2012-07-27  3:45 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2012-07-27  3:45 Keith Seitz [this message]
2012-07-27 11:03 ` Eli Zaretskii
2012-07-29 18:51   ` Keith Seitz
2012-07-29 19:36     ` Eli Zaretskii
2012-08-01 10:14     ` Pedro Alves

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=50120ECF.4020709@redhat.com \
    --to=keiths@redhat.com \
    --cc=gdb-patches@sourceware.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox