From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from simark.ca by simark.ca with LMTP id YAlRGM9U2Gd/7RIAWB0awg (envelope-from ) for ; Mon, 17 Mar 2025 12:58:55 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=simark.ca; s=mail; t=1742230735; bh=Uecomd0hamq5Azb7V8hoZ+mej/fvc4Q9Oqc49UcsmVU=; h=Date:Subject:To:Cc:References:From:In-Reply-To:List-Id: List-Unsubscribe:List-Archive:List-Post:List-Help:List-Subscribe: From; b=k3w7oQvIcmPqjMSWzN0SPUzeCcmZQk6G9QYIlcbwPUd6LkqJ/33W/LctS1kuyMZGh 3MG/O/mI5v9wExAvhyNFdOoR20jtL6pjMq3Z/BIDHo8Bz99KlOFDOLEKB+Zvw+v3R1 fq73H96jdw+RXHekjMeXS4obE2cNZvQwbUhIsObI= Received: by simark.ca (Postfix, from userid 112) id 5E3871E100; Mon, 17 Mar 2025 12:58:55 -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=VMzGY5G8; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=simark.ca header.i=@simark.ca header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=mail header.b=wu6+5bMW; 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 EEF651E0C0 for ; Mon, 17 Mar 2025 12:58:54 -0400 (EDT) Received: from server2.sourceware.org (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6E1B2385B521 for ; Mon, 17 Mar 2025 16:58:53 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 6E1B2385B521 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=VMzGY5G8; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=simark.ca header.i=@simark.ca header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=mail header.b=wu6+5bMW Received: from simark.ca (simark.ca [158.69.221.121]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C0BB7385AC3B for ; Mon, 17 Mar 2025 15:36:53 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 sourceware.org C0BB7385AC3B 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 C0BB7385AC3B 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=1742225813; cv=none; b=fp/Nq9wePSc1DKkbPe+txRF0rgkb3p/l8zaB5YOf0Sqngl9H9S/MYaVR4qYIAYqwJLoFKi0Ts1fnrgALGTyLNSsjUiW+6gcc3tI+UWfDP6WsAp+W/HAotaMRB+Ram5kys84Ihd9W29xYByx2uHCTUBNouD11EecX9zVWw5ONnAM= ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=sourceware.org; s=key; t=1742225813; c=relaxed/simple; bh=Uecomd0hamq5Azb7V8hoZ+mej/fvc4Q9Oqc49UcsmVU=; h=DKIM-Signature:DKIM-Signature:Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version: Subject:To:From; b=hSUpYGloBR8SFbidttlu5Dg9rjlcR189Iv3DLVIIVu5M1cAv0eB7D7U+hYzgjJr5TUwVce+AvAzRyKpo/Eclql5xH4x1ndxniAL18CbfxuAEpFjt5sfZLAqC35LF6u6ma6eDEJsHSkNGghKLW1s7E5O18ZOpoztkkSNNj3vOrIc= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; server2.sourceware.org DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=simark.ca; s=mail; t=1742225779; bh=Uecomd0hamq5Azb7V8hoZ+mej/fvc4Q9Oqc49UcsmVU=; h=Date:Subject:To:Cc:References:From:In-Reply-To:From; b=VMzGY5G8C+jRaA/vvlf+Wtotep8Rf9Vf3yL3BRVUPezVz/dL392sIA4KSZuxpijl/ 5nVw15dwRnE74tG1aja2KmbQL3kQeCghhqBF2uBG6yzkvKpbX0qWwBlUZBbEZa1cMu 9WENDmmI4O2RqlB5tT1dHtXEjvPbguteNGKNGVEk= Received: by simark.ca (Postfix, from userid 112) id 7D3F41E114; Mon, 17 Mar 2025 11:36:19 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=simark.ca; s=mail; t=1742225778; bh=Uecomd0hamq5Azb7V8hoZ+mej/fvc4Q9Oqc49UcsmVU=; h=Date:Subject:To:Cc:References:From:In-Reply-To:From; b=wu6+5bMWU+rVA4i2CJna/EzsI4c5NSv09DPUllXGNJQ7q4tQeWYynzR/W+fyuv63I WlDHsoivNC6AcjlAO0dBTRTzuPMDVMqWHDgxmY6jCQOJyhkjrAhe8fO6sgvgxRCdXo NRZx72UKr7FTVkIHp0aqweuxWolGth93y2d18Ekw= 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 BD77A1E0C0; Mon, 17 Mar 2025 11:36:18 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2025 11:36:18 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: [PATCH] gdb: Introduce user-friendly namespace identifier for "info shared" To: Guinevere Larsen , Kevin Buettner Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org References: <20250313170004.3362207-2-guinevere@redhat.com> <20250314195108.2c4891a9@f41-zbm-amd> <20250314201112.29c30ab8@f41-zbm-amd> Content-Language: fr From: Simon Marchi In-Reply-To: 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 On 3/17/25 7:55 AM, Guinevere Larsen wrote: > I can give this a shot, but in my head there are 2 ways of implementing it: > > 1. If there is more than one linker namespace *active* when the command is run; > 2. If there is more than one linker namespace *registered* when the command is run; > > The main difference is: if the inferior has opened an SO in a namespace, but has since closed it and everything loaded is in the default namespace, should we still have the NS column? The first is closer to a future plan of having an "active namespaces" convenience variable, while the second is brand new code that I don't expect to use anywhere else, but I can see an argument for it, so which do you prefer? I don't know much about linker namespaces, so I don't know which option is better, but I agree that not showing the column when the program doesn't deal with non-default namespaces would be nice. We do something similar for instance with info threads: if there is a single inferior, we don't show the inferior number in the thread id, otherwise we do. Simon