From: Yao Qi <qiyaoltc@gmail.com>
To: "Metzger\, Markus T" <markus.t.metzger@intel.com>
Cc: "gdb-patches\@sourceware.org" <gdb-patches@sourceware.org>,
"Wiederhake\, Tim" <tim.wiederhake@intel.com>,
"xdje42\@gmail.com" <xdje42@gmail.com>,
"Joel Brobecker" <brobecker@adacore.com>
Subject: Re: GDB 8.0 release/branching 2017-03-20 update
Date: Fri, 31 Mar 2017 13:55:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <86h929wnxi.fsf@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <A78C989F6D9628469189715575E55B2340077D34@IRSMSX104.ger.corp.intel.com> (Markus T. Metzger's message of "Thu, 30 Mar 2017 15:55:49 +0000")
"Metzger, Markus T" <markus.t.metzger@intel.com> writes:
> I thought we need it because we may get RecordFullInstruction in the future
> that needs to store different data and install different functions.
>
> They will behave identical but will have different implementations.
Do you have some concrete reasons that we may change
Record{Full,Btrace,...}Instruction in C? I can't figure out the reason
in the future we do the change, so I don't worry it now.
>
> Can they pretend to be the same type in Python?
Suppose one day in the future, we really need such change. We can still
have different C structs for different record methods, different
PyTypeObject but with the same .tp_name "gdb.RecordInstruction" and
different .tp_getset. I hacked GDB code, and find python doesn't
complain that I call PyType_Ready with different PyTypeObject, but they
have the same .tp_name. Everything works fine.
If the change I do above is hacky, then we have to create sub-types of
RecordInstruction for different record methods in C
(gdb.priv.RecordFullinstruction for example?), but Python interface is
still documented as returning type gdb.RecordInstruction.
r = gdb.current_recording()
insn = r.instruction_history
print insn[0].pc
print insn[0].sal
and the in C code for .instruction_history,
if (obj->method == RECORD_METHOD_BTRACE)
return recpy_bt_instruction_history (obj->ptid, closure);
else if (obj->method == RECORD_METHOD_FULL)
{
gdbpy_ref<> list (PyList_New (0));
fullpy_insn_object * const obj = PyObject_New (fullpy_insn_object,
&fullpy_insn_type);
if (obj == NULL)
return NULL;
obj->insn.insn.pc = 11;
obj->insn.insn.size = 22;
PyList_Append (list.get (), (PyObject *) obj);
return PyList_AsTuple (list.get ());
}
return PyErr_Format (PyExc_NotImplementedError, _("Not implemented."));
Python code still uses insn[0] as the base type RecordInstruction, and
Python code doesn't need to know the sub-types of RecordInstruction C
code creates. We deliberately don't document these sub-types in GDB if
we add them. IMO, not every python types we added in C are public types.
--
Yao (齐尧)
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-03-31 13:55 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 40+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-03-20 20:16 Joel Brobecker
2017-03-20 20:21 ` Keith Seitz
2017-03-20 22:39 ` Yao Qi
2017-03-20 22:47 ` Yao Qi
2017-03-20 22:52 ` Joel Brobecker
2017-03-20 23:03 ` Yao Qi
2017-03-21 13:28 ` Joel Brobecker
2017-03-21 7:35 ` Wiederhake, Tim
2017-03-21 13:28 ` Joel Brobecker
2017-03-21 13:07 ` Yao Qi
2017-03-21 13:31 ` Joel Brobecker
2017-03-22 13:58 ` Metzger, Markus T
2017-03-22 17:09 ` Yao Qi
2017-03-23 16:01 ` Metzger, Markus T
2017-03-23 17:25 ` Yao Qi
2017-03-23 18:17 ` Metzger, Markus T
2017-03-24 14:41 ` Yao Qi
2017-03-27 10:51 ` Metzger, Markus T
2017-03-27 11:19 ` Yao Qi
2017-03-27 12:46 ` Metzger, Markus T
2017-03-27 16:03 ` Yao Qi
2017-03-28 7:16 ` Metzger, Markus T
2017-03-28 13:25 ` Yao Qi
2017-03-28 15:08 ` Metzger, Markus T
2017-03-28 15:49 ` Yao Qi
2017-03-29 6:08 ` Metzger, Markus T
[not found] ` <861stgo072.fsf@gmail.com>
2017-03-29 14:38 ` Metzger, Markus T
2017-03-30 10:50 ` Yao Qi
2017-03-30 11:58 ` Metzger, Markus T
[not found] ` <86h92a4w86.fsf@gmail.com>
2017-03-30 15:55 ` Metzger, Markus T
2017-03-31 13:55 ` Yao Qi [this message]
2017-03-31 15:21 ` Metzger, Markus T
2017-03-31 16:02 ` Joel Brobecker
2017-04-06 14:40 ` Wiederhake, Tim
2017-04-07 8:10 ` Yao Qi
2017-04-07 11:53 ` Wiederhake, Tim
2017-04-07 15:19 ` Yao Qi
2017-03-21 14:00 ` Yao Qi
2017-03-21 14:03 ` Pedro Alves
2017-03-27 13:35 ` Antoine Tremblay
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=86h929wnxi.fsf@gmail.com \
--to=qiyaoltc@gmail.com \
--cc=brobecker@adacore.com \
--cc=gdb-patches@sourceware.org \
--cc=markus.t.metzger@intel.com \
--cc=tim.wiederhake@intel.com \
--cc=xdje42@gmail.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox