From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 14077 invoked by alias); 28 Oct 2013 14:27:07 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 14066 invoked by uid 89); 28 Oct 2013 14:27:06 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-2.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 X-HELO: mx1.redhat.com Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Mon, 28 Oct 2013 14:27:06 +0000 Received: from int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.22]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id r9SER3QJ007336 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Mon, 28 Oct 2013 10:27:03 -0400 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (ovpn01.gateway.prod.ext.ams2.redhat.com [10.39.146.11]) by int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id r9SER12G022966; Mon, 28 Oct 2013 10:27:02 -0400 Message-ID: <526E7435.2030801@redhat.com> Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2013 14:27:00 -0000 From: Pedro Alves User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130625 Thunderbird/17.0.7 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Yao Qi CC: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix ada inferior-data cleanup References: <1382759789-777-1-git-send-email-yao@codesourcery.com> <526E4A3D.60503@redhat.com> <526E5702.8070104@codesourcery.com> In-Reply-To: <526E5702.8070104@codesourcery.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2013-10/txt/msg00858.txt.bz2 On 10/28/2013 12:22 PM, Yao Qi wrote: > On 10/28/2013 07:27 PM, Pedro Alves wrote: >>> 'struct ada_inferior_data' is registered to per-inferior-data with >>>> cleanup ada_inferior_data_cleanup, which means the data will be >>>> destroyed when the inferior exits. >> That's not correct. The registry data cleanups are only ran when >> the inferior object is destroyed, IOW, when the inferior is >> removed/deleted (e.g, with "remove-inferiors"), not when the program >> exits. >> > > Is it a good idea to call clear_inferior_data when inferior exists (in > exit_inferior_1)? IMO, it's not, for it confuses two different lifetimes. It's quite plausible to have data associated with the inferior object that should be preserved across runs. > These inferior_exit observer functions are duplicated to > inferior_data_cleanup functions. WDYT? There's really no reason for the code to be duplicated. For each case, a helper that does the real work can be called from wherever necessary, for instance. -- Pedro Alves