From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 73367 invoked by alias); 4 Jun 2018 21:34:02 -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 73338 invoked by uid 89); 4 Jun 2018 21:34:00 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,SPF_HELO_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy=helping, is!, UD:dwarf2read.c, dwarf2readc 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, 04 Jun 2018 21:33:59 +0000 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx05.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.15]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 146B81CC771; Mon, 4 Jun 2018 21:33:58 +0000 (UTC) Received: from theo.uglyboxes.com (ovpn04.gateway.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.9.4]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CF4125D6A5; Mon, 4 Jun 2018 21:33:57 +0000 (UTC) Subject: Re: GDB 8.1.1 release, 2018-05-30 update To: Joel Brobecker Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org References: <20180530222013.5pvgedo2moxlvmbf@adacore.com> <20180604211800.h7nh2nifhuauberg@adacore.com> From: Keith Seitz Message-ID: <6b81ad5a-0195-58e9-083c-535c505acb0c@redhat.com> Date: Mon, 04 Jun 2018 21:34:00 -0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.5.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20180604211800.h7nh2nifhuauberg@adacore.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2018-06/txt/msg00083.txt.bz2 On 06/04/2018 02:18 PM, Joel Brobecker wrote: > > Sorry to hear that. Hope you're better now! > Some sort of 24-hour bug. Thank you for your well-wishes. >> I'm still trying to write a reproducer. It's just really, really elusive. > > Do you think we have reached the point where we might be past > what's reasonable for trying to create a regression test? Just > trying to guage a bit whether it's worth pouring more resources > into trying to get one, vs using the resources elsewhere. Yeah, I've pretty much given up on triggering the exact conditions that cause a user-visible manifestation of this bug. I have a dwarf assembler file that I've been hacking at, and it is getting *quite* large. Still no luck in causing this bug to trigger. However, I have been thinking about an alternative, easier way to trigger the bug. That is by wrapping add_symbol_to_list in dwarf2read.c with a custom version that checks if we are adding symbols to a language_minimal dictionary. If it sees that, it issues a complaint. [Or add another option to turn this on/off.] Once again that adds complexity into an already performance-sensitive area, and I'm not really sure it is worth the effort anymore. Not to mention how hacky it is! So really, I can continue down this road, or maintainers can make the call to omit a test case for it entirely. Otherwise, I'll return my attention to helping with the patch review backlog. Keith