From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from simark.ca by simark.ca with LMTP id t6sDD16b2mPrVScAWB0awg (envelope-from ) for ; Wed, 01 Feb 2023 12:03:26 -0500 Received: by simark.ca (Postfix, from userid 112) id 2DB1D1E128; Wed, 1 Feb 2023 12:03:26 -0500 (EST) Authentication-Results: simark.ca; dkim=pass (1024-bit key; secure) header.d=sourceware.org header.i=@sourceware.org header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=default header.b=luMOjKcK; dkim-atps=neutral X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on simark.ca X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,NICE_REPLY_A, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED,RDNS_DYNAMIC,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 Received: from sourceware.org (ip-8-43-85-97.sourceware.org [8.43.85.97]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by simark.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 423941E112 for ; Wed, 1 Feb 2023 12:03:25 -0500 (EST) Received: from server2.sourceware.org (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 642D93858413 for ; Wed, 1 Feb 2023 17:03:24 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 642D93858413 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sourceware.org; s=default; t=1675271004; bh=cA87+7y3NtobQ2b2F5179m0jGEfLBkv7qKaFqrKrj1A=; h=Date:Subject:To:Cc:References:In-Reply-To:List-Id: List-Unsubscribe:List-Archive:List-Post:List-Help:List-Subscribe: From:Reply-To:From; b=luMOjKcKYpSYRWppQIZhcuTqawzeIOH1e7XhBcg1kuPNdgy/rOkOdblpWo5JfiaKH 4GRqDYG9M8O390QLV9jgq6qC/zPWJJSWFvGDsQXU5GeP4EoSmCU+p4VGt3Agu7+r6B HVn9wUEs3j5nevZhGLc0ETdCh5ZHlE8/gVz3VFWI= Received: from simark.ca (simark.ca [158.69.221.121]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A7DFB3858D33 for ; Wed, 1 Feb 2023 17:03:02 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 sourceware.org A7DFB3858D33 Received: from [10.0.0.11] (unknown [217.28.27.60]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by simark.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 1B53C1E112; Wed, 1 Feb 2023 12:03:02 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <502f0bd0-9b18-9a31-0094-7a9bd4778bd2@simark.ca> Date: Wed, 1 Feb 2023 12:03:01 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.6.1 Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 5/8] gdbserver: Transmit target description ID in thread list and stop reply Content-Language: en-US To: Andrew Burgess , Thiago Jung Bauermann via Gdb-patches Cc: Thiago Jung Bauermann , Simon Marchi References: <20230130044518.3322695-1-thiago.bauermann@linaro.org> <20230130044518.3322695-6-thiago.bauermann@linaro.org> <87bkmdtp4n.fsf@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <87bkmdtp4n.fsf@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit 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: , From: Simon Marchi via Gdb-patches Reply-To: Simon Marchi Errors-To: gdb-patches-bounces+public-inbox=simark.ca@sourceware.org Sender: "Gdb-patches" > Having read some of the later patches, I have some additional thoughts > here: > > I think we should make it explicit here that IDs are connection wide, > not per-process. We should also make it clear that GDB might[1] cache > target descriptions per remote connection, and so a remote target should > not reuse a target description ID except where the target description is > identical. > > [1] I say "GDB might" here because if we say "GDB will" then this would > imply each target description will only be asked for once. And I > figure, why be overly restrictive. Thanks for pointing this out, I had the same thought while reading the patch. In my original idea, I imagined that target description IDs could be some hashes computed from the XML content (a bit like git hashes or ELF build IDs), such that a given target description would always have the same ID. This would give clients the possibility to cache target descriptions locally, a bit like the index cache. It did sound nice, but perhaps it's not really important. Simon