From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 5623 invoked by alias); 4 Dec 2013 14:54:13 -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 5593 invoked by uid 89); 4 Dec 2013 14:54:13 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_50,RDNS_NONE autolearn=no version=3.3.2 X-HELO: mail-gw2-out.broadcom.com Received: from Unknown (HELO mail-gw2-out.broadcom.com) (216.31.210.63) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Wed, 04 Dec 2013 14:52:26 +0000 Received: from irvexchcas08.broadcom.com (HELO IRVEXCHCAS08.corp.ad.broadcom.com) ([10.9.208.57]) by mail-gw2-out.broadcom.com with ESMTP; 04 Dec 2013 06:56:28 -0800 Received: from IRVEXCHSMTP3.corp.ad.broadcom.com (10.9.207.53) by IRVEXCHCAS08.corp.ad.broadcom.com (10.9.208.57) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.438.0; Wed, 4 Dec 2013 06:52:19 -0800 Received: from mail-irva-13.broadcom.com (10.10.10.20) by IRVEXCHSMTP3.corp.ad.broadcom.com (10.9.207.53) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 14.1.438.0; Wed, 4 Dec 2013 06:52:18 -0800 Received: from [10.177.73.48] (unknown [10.177.73.48]) by mail-irva-13.broadcom.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5C945246A5; Wed, 4 Dec 2013 06:52:18 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <529F41A1.2060100@broadcom.com> Date: Wed, 04 Dec 2013 14:54:00 -0000 From: Andrew Burgess User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.1.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Pedro Alves CC: "gdb-patches@sourceware.org" Subject: Re: [RFC 00/12] Merge value optimized_out and unavailable References: <5208D1DF.1090201@broadcom.com> <5298F718.8060104@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <5298F718.8060104@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2013-12/txt/msg00141.txt.bz2 On 29/11/2013 8:20 PM, Pedro Alves wrote: > On 08/12/2013 01:15 PM, Andrew Burgess wrote: >> This patch set merges together how gdb handles values that are >> optimized out and values that are unavailable. Thanks for taking the time to review these patches. I'll go through your comments and see if there's a way that this could be moved forward, I already have one small patch to post that can be split from this series. >> After this patch set there will be a single unified interface to ask >> if a value is available (either fully, partially, or for a range of >> bit/bytes), this will answer in terms of both optimized out and >> unavailable state. > > On terminology: I'd much rather not overload the "available/unavailable" > words for this. It'll end up confusing, like "This value is > not available, because it was unavailable? No, because it > was optimized out.". Etc. I agree, and I should have mentioned this. To avoid excessive churn I had not tried to resolve this issue, but the way I currently see it we have two current reasons for unavailability, "optimized-out" and "not-collected" (not-collected covers not collected by a trace frame, or not collected in a core file). For a consistent user experience we'd probably always print "optimized-out" or "unavailable" to the user, but within gdb I had imagined transitioning to an API that reflected that above naming scheme. Thanks, Andrew