From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from simark.ca by simark.ca with LMTP id wPTKKoNq2GcCAhMAWB0awg (envelope-from ) for ; Mon, 17 Mar 2025 14:31:31 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=simark.ca; s=mail; t=1742236291; bh=rbOi3H39Row3CD5OSUMYPtq0Xycs07Q723mlfuQJmf0=; h=Date:Subject:To:References:From:In-Reply-To:List-Id: List-Unsubscribe:List-Archive:List-Post:List-Help:List-Subscribe: From; b=CsOd8vB6mzIa4b9AuCl3LW5QxrX0rxYnGh0uZJgUA0LSWn21BJp2iDOomjP/i/MEV ipPaOQ4Efy+xOv/eYOIYVn756kVOmvslInlCgHSIVGgIhZPjMOtRy4PwE9J+gZP5Kn R+bMpQAkbZRa0V6FN0xrfodY5FUP3xOVD/3HT/Pc= Received: by simark.ca (Postfix, from userid 112) id AAB6D1E100; Mon, 17 Mar 2025 14:31:31 -0400 (EDT) X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.1 (2024-03-25) on simark.ca X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.4 required=5.0 tests=ARC_SIGNED,ARC_VALID,BAYES_00, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=4.0.1 Authentication-Results: simark.ca; dkim=pass (1024-bit key; unprotected) header.d=simark.ca header.i=@simark.ca header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=mail header.b=UCXV08sP; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=simark.ca header.i=@simark.ca header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=mail header.b=aCqJWXPk; dkim-atps=neutral Received: from server2.sourceware.org (server2.sourceware.org [8.43.85.97]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (prime256v1) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by simark.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0FD041E0C0 for ; Mon, 17 Mar 2025 14:31:31 -0400 (EDT) Received: from server2.sourceware.org (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EC990385B522 for ; Mon, 17 Mar 2025 18:31:29 +0000 (GMT) Received: from simark.ca (simark.ca [158.69.221.121]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A53F8385842A for ; Mon, 17 Mar 2025 17:54:25 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 sourceware.org A53F8385842A Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=simark.ca Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=simark.ca ARC-Filter: OpenARC Filter v1.0.0 sourceware.org A53F8385842A Authentication-Results: server2.sourceware.org; arc=none smtp.remote-ip=158.69.221.121 ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=sourceware.org; s=key; t=1742234070; cv=none; b=U2/8RHgKNHfPWNRgSjaKJ30ydpHovCI+0Lhvednm1w3UeljXh3jxw3zbpJn8nw7hA8In99dEnp4Kbje6OSg1xqyxzR9XclttBI5aMlmYBSIIKZeo4X4mkHJ5EQZg4T7mAiecraff0PQLVqRWuAUG8Uf1RbsTC/KRQQEcTqC5Isk= ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=sourceware.org; s=key; t=1742234070; c=relaxed/simple; bh=rbOi3H39Row3CD5OSUMYPtq0Xycs07Q723mlfuQJmf0=; h=DKIM-Signature:DKIM-Signature:Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version: Subject:To:From; b=nQuv1wuZwpw/Vjcmplw0NOtitLs5MYpp5iXY3leZhg/bycIkARZpWyEM4ezIQE+CD0UOiHDlmPH9FjiWzPJ2NZufxwBbwAqrpuhlZtwUognnkmwiFHVnIt3Fg3Xfq3eNIriyGeS0MCIYCjQ2mc4+iwbX7v/mtM3mrz8OY1+G9mA= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; server2.sourceware.org DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org A53F8385842A Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key, unprotected) header.d=simark.ca header.i=@simark.ca header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=mail header.b=UCXV08sP; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=simark.ca header.i=@simark.ca header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=mail header.b=aCqJWXPk DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=simark.ca; s=mail; t=1742234065; bh=rbOi3H39Row3CD5OSUMYPtq0Xycs07Q723mlfuQJmf0=; h=Date:Subject:To:References:From:In-Reply-To:From; b=UCXV08sPCPN9hEv61vVkxzr2XlMDRxcuWMfVlneeh5SU4CNwwOH9VoSAAQqLQ5ZLh 1nM/E92kXpTtwXfJRd7d5jAFSmrV0eJZma2cvoG5GN+AmejvfWWkzJsaRsS6iWXYYJ r85liYsv9PkMhaLw2KxSDfvlROMB8bHtelCTNXO0= Received: by simark.ca (Postfix, from userid 112) id 5EBD41E10E; Mon, 17 Mar 2025 13:54:25 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=simark.ca; s=mail; t=1742234064; bh=rbOi3H39Row3CD5OSUMYPtq0Xycs07Q723mlfuQJmf0=; h=Date:Subject:To:References:From:In-Reply-To:From; b=aCqJWXPkdchWBuamsGb0BKzvg3Op/k9j+krSpC7jdYAH03eO2P1h3fBXc6OxXHMv5 5CsXOz6EjGxjhbUs0vylkeQPoaVUyFZBdNSouUwZZFgzzxaGTOs9EDynTyrunFbvBz ckEkOvEQssQR9YIuXJyiL2scAF/sw649sFXxjqXs= Received: from [172.16.0.192] (96-127-217-162.qc.cable.ebox.net [96.127.217.162]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (prime256v1) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by simark.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 57A461E0C0; Mon, 17 Mar 2025 13:54:24 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2025 13:54:23 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: [PATCH] gdb: Introduce user-friendly namespace identifier for "info shared" To: Guinevere Larsen , gdb-patches@sourceware.org References: <20250313170004.3362207-2-guinevere@redhat.com> <3ae8ab32-8633-4a07-bc4f-5bdab899aa31@simark.ca> <4fa90990-09d0-450d-9006-f0a296b2dad9@redhat.com> Content-Language: fr From: Simon Marchi In-Reply-To: <4fa90990-09d0-450d-9006-f0a296b2dad9@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-BeenThere: gdb-patches@sourceware.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.30 Precedence: list List-Id: Gdb-patches mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: gdb-patches-bounces~public-inbox=simark.ca@sourceware.org > The issue here is handling dlclose calls. When svr4 detects a dlclose > call, it will clear the solib_lists object, and read all the SOs > again. So if the dlclose call has deactivated a namespace, we don't > have an easy way to identify which namespaces were deactivated, and > the way to handle this is to deactivate them all and reactivate them > in svr4_maybe_add_namespace. > > And we need all the data to reactivate namespaces to be stored in > svr4_info, because if the target is a gdbserver, we're reading > everything through svr4_current_sos_via_xfer_libraries, and it doesn't > sound like a good idea to modify the xml parsing code to pass some > context that would only be useful for solib-svr4. > > While writing this, I realized I might be able to simplify this, > having just a set of namespace IDs that are active, which will make > the synchronization much simpler. Ok you lost me there :). I'll see in the next patch version. Simon