From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 12472 invoked by alias); 6 May 2015 14:11:04 -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 12449 invoked by uid 89); 6 May 2015 14:11:03 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD 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 (AES256-GCM-SHA384 encrypted) ESMTPS; Wed, 06 May 2015 14:11:03 +0000 Received: from int-mx14.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx14.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.27]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id t46EB1NG019887 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=FAIL) for ; Wed, 6 May 2015 10:11:02 -0400 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (ovpn01.gateway.prod.ext.ams2.redhat.com [10.39.146.11]) by int-mx14.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id t46EAxv5025342; Wed, 6 May 2015 10:11:00 -0400 Message-ID: <554A20F3.1010404@redhat.com> Date: Wed, 06 May 2015 14:11:00 -0000 From: Pedro Alves User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.5.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Jan Kratochvil CC: gdb-patches@sourceware.org, Phil Muldoon Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 7/9] compile: New 'compile print' References: <20150411194322.29128.52477.stgit@host1.jankratochvil.net> <20150411194418.29128.3411.stgit@host1.jankratochvil.net> <5540FD9E.1020005@redhat.com> <20150503140557.GB18394@host1.jankratochvil.net> <5549EB49.2050206@redhat.com> <20150506122301.GA20986@host1.jankratochvil.net> In-Reply-To: <20150506122301.GA20986@host1.jankratochvil.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2015-05/txt/msg00102.txt.bz2 On 05/06/2015 01:23 PM, Jan Kratochvil wrote: > On Wed, 06 May 2015 12:22:01 +0200, Pedro Alves wrote: >> On 05/03/2015 03:05 PM, Jan Kratochvil wrote: >>> Function returns NULL only for COMPILE_I_PRINT_ADDRESS_SCOPE when >>> COMPILE_I_PRINT_VALUE_SCOPE should have been used instead. >> >> What does "should have been used instead" mean? Is that a bug in the >> caller? > > Currently GDB has to decide whether it should compile with GCC > memcpy (buffer, &variable, ...) > or > memcpy (buffer, variable, ...) > depending on whether 'variable' is scalar (first) or an array (second). > > Currently GDB can figure it out only from DWARF, after compiling it first. > > This is all a hack how to get it working for live targets without implementing > the compiler IR (intermediate representation) interpreter in GDB (making > 'compile' commands compatible with core files). So far AFAIK C++ live > functionality has been a top priority, not the IR interpreter. This > COMPILE_I_PRINT_ADDRESS_SCOPE-or-COMPILE_I_PRINT_VALUE_SCOPE conditional would > be some simple runtime conditional in the IR interpreter instead. > > If an implementation on top of IR interpreter is required for these patches > then this whole patch series should be dropped and we need to start to work on > the IR interpreter instead. No, IR interpreter is certainly not a requirement. But I think the comment that explains the current implementation should be clear. As is, it's just that I still don't understand what you mean by: > Function returns NULL only for COMPILE_I_PRINT_ADDRESS_SCOPE when > COMPILE_I_PRINT_VALUE_SCOPE should have been used instead. because reading this one wonders: "OK, if COMPILE_I_PRINT_VALUE_SCOPE should have been used, why wasn't it used then? Is that a bug in the caller?" Thanks, Pedro Alves