From: Jason Molenda <jmolenda@apple.com>
To: Andrew Cagney <cagney@gnu.org>, Joel Brobecker <brobecker@gnat.com>
Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
Subject: Question about blockframe.c:inside_main_func()
Date: Thu, 29 Apr 2004 00:17:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <9B827536-9972-11D8-9EA7-000A9569836A@apple.com> (raw)
Hi all,
We're bringing up the currentish gdb sources here at Apple and I was
debugging a problem with inside_main_func () [*] when I noticed that
there seems to be a bit of extra computation that has snuck into the
function during the changes since July.
Previously, inside_main_func() would find the "main" function in the
"symfile_objfile", find its start and end addresses (if debug symbols
were present I guess) and on subsequent invocations, use those cached
addresses to determine if the addr in question is contained within the
"main" function.
The current inside_main_func() will do
msymbol = lookup_minimal_symbol (main_name (), NULL,
symfile_objfile);// every time
if (msymbol != NULL // once
&& symfile_objfile->ei.main_func_lowpc == INVALID_ENTRY_LOWPC
&& symfile_objfile->ei.main_func_highpc == INVALID_ENTRY_HIGHPC)
if (msymbol != NULL && MSYMBOL_TYPE (msymbol) == mst_text) // every
time
{
[... lots of stuff ...]
}
I realize this is hardly a performance critical function, but it's
still a long shot from the version that existed before July which would
find the start/end addresses and then do
if (symfile_objfile->ei.main_func_lowpc == INVALID_ENTRY_LOWPC && //
once
symfile_objfile->ei.main_func_highpc == INVALID_ENTRY_HIGHPC)
[... lookup symbol ... ]
return (symfile_objfile->ei.main_func_lowpc <= pc
&& symfile_objfile->ei.main_func_highpc > pc);
Is there some reason why this shortcut has been dropped? Is there a
reason not to add a conditional to the top to detect "main"'s bounds
being detected and short-circuit the searching we're doing every time.
Jason
[*] We have something called "ZeroLink" where the main executable --
the symfile_objfile -- is a tiny stub that demand-loads each object
file (formatted like a shared library) as functions/global variables in
those .o's are referenced. So in our case, the symfile_objfile doesn't
contain main at all; hence me looking into this function and scratching
my head about why it's re-searching for this function every time...
next reply other threads:[~2004-04-29 0:17 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2004-04-29 0:17 Jason Molenda [this message]
2004-04-29 1:02 ` Joel Brobecker
2004-04-29 1:50 ` Jason Molenda
2004-04-29 15:09 ` Andrew Cagney
2004-04-30 0:27 ` Jason Molenda
2004-04-30 0:49 ` Andrew Cagney
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=9B827536-9972-11D8-9EA7-000A9569836A@apple.com \
--to=jmolenda@apple.com \
--cc=brobecker@gnat.com \
--cc=cagney@gnu.org \
--cc=gdb-patches@sources.redhat.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