From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 29550 invoked by alias); 7 May 2012 20:27:44 -0000 Received: (qmail 29534 invoked by uid 22791); 7 May 2012 20:27:43 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.5 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,KHOP_RCVD_UNTRUST,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_W,SPF_HELO_PASS,TW_GJ,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Mon, 07 May 2012 20:27:29 +0000 Received: from int-mx02.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx02.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.12]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id q47KRTm3009835 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK) for ; Mon, 7 May 2012 16:27:29 -0400 Received: from barimba (ovpn01.gateway.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.9.1]) by int-mx02.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id q47KRRww031491 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Mon, 7 May 2012 16:27:28 -0400 From: Tom Tromey To: Jan Kratochvil Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org, Gary Benson Subject: Re: [RFA] Improved linker-debugger interface References: <20120504152129.GA7418@redhat.com> <20120507165648.GA22472@host2.jankratochvil.net> Date: Mon, 07 May 2012 20:27:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: <20120507165648.GA22472@host2.jankratochvil.net> (Jan Kratochvil's message of "Mon, 7 May 2012 18:56:48 +0200") Message-ID: <87r4uvwxcg.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.0.95 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain 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 X-SW-Source: 2012-05/txt/msg00199.txt.bz2 Gary> My current setup has a probe everywhere _dl_debug_state is called, Jan> I believe you should submit the STAP (SystemTap) probes patch to Jan> GNU libc along. I do not see too great to patch GNU gdb for a libc Jan> feature not in GNU libc. I don't see that as such a big deal. We have patches in gdb for all kinds of system- and compiler-specific behavior. At least in this case the patches in question are public and free software. I do agree that we should make another attempt to get the probes upstream; I just don't think success at that should be a precondition for this patch. FWIW, we already have support for the glibc longjmp probes in the tree now. Tom