From: Andrew Burgess <aburgess@redhat.com>
To: "Rohr, Stephan" <stephan.rohr@intel.com>
Cc: "gdb-patches@sourceware.org" <gdb-patches@sourceware.org>,
Tom Tromey <tom@tromey.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH 1/1] gdb: set the cache information in 'get_prev_frame_maybe_check_cycle'
Date: Sat, 18 Jul 2026 12:57:07 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87ik6ccxyk.fsf@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <DS7PR11MB6247A7C28E23919513FD41D993F82@DS7PR11MB6247.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
"Rohr, Stephan" <stephan.rohr@intel.com> writes:
> Hi Andrew,
>
> thanks for getting back with that. This was also my first approach
> to fix the issue. The only limitation I see is that we have a duplicate
> entry into the frame_list when we setup the return value. When the
> dtor of prev_frame is called, it is removed again. I see this the only
> side effect of the patch.
Sorry about that, I guess I lost track of the original proposal
somewhere along the way.
I've gone ahead and pushed this patch for now. I ran into this issue
again with another a second series that I'm working on, so I'd like to
see this fix landed, and it looks like we're both OK with this approach.
I agree there are some minor costs, but I don't see them as significant,
and anything else will also have some cost associated anyway, so I don't
think this is obviously that much worse than anything else.
>
> I'm personally fine with the proposed change as this is a minimal fix
> for the bug. I agree that a perfect fix would defer the frame_info_ptr
> creation until the frame-id is computed, but I think this is out of
> scope for this patch.
Agreed. I have this down as something to look at in the future. I have
another series in progress that touches frame related stuff, so I need
to see how that will go first, but after that I might revisit this.
Thanks,
Andrew
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-07-18 11:57 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-06-25 14:58 [PATCH 0/1] " Stephan Rohr
2026-06-25 14:58 ` [PATCH 1/1] " Stephan Rohr
2026-06-26 15:06 ` Tom Tromey
2026-06-29 14:04 ` Rohr, Stephan
2026-07-06 15:06 ` Andrew Burgess
2026-07-07 7:57 ` Rohr, Stephan
2026-07-07 16:04 ` Andrew Burgess
2026-07-08 8:46 ` Rohr, Stephan
2026-07-08 13:59 ` Andrew Burgess
2026-07-08 15:18 ` Rohr, Stephan
2026-07-14 15:14 ` Andrew Burgess
2026-07-15 7:33 ` Rohr, Stephan
2026-07-18 11:57 ` Andrew Burgess [this message]
2026-07-20 17:39 ` Tom Tromey
2026-07-07 10:33 ` Andrew Burgess
2026-07-07 12:25 ` Rohr, Stephan
2026-07-07 15:04 ` Andrew Burgess
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=87ik6ccxyk.fsf@redhat.com \
--to=aburgess@redhat.com \
--cc=gdb-patches@sourceware.org \
--cc=stephan.rohr@intel.com \
--cc=tom@tromey.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