From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 112890 invoked by alias); 13 Apr 2017 10:52:34 -0000 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 Received: (qmail 112880 invoked by uid 89); 13 Apr 2017 10:52:33 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.8 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,KAM_LAZY_DOMAIN_SECURITY,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW autolearn=no version=3.3.2 spammy=honest, our, interest X-HELO: mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com Received: from mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (HELO mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com) (148.163.156.1) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Thu, 13 Apr 2017 10:52:31 +0000 Received: from pps.filterd (m0098393.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.16.0.20/8.16.0.20) with SMTP id v3DAmdUJ094547 for ; Thu, 13 Apr 2017 06:52:32 -0400 Received: from e06smtp13.uk.ibm.com (e06smtp13.uk.ibm.com [195.75.94.109]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 29t7knrx99-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT) for ; Thu, 13 Apr 2017 06:52:31 -0400 Received: from localhost by e06smtp13.uk.ibm.com with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted for from ; Thu, 13 Apr 2017 11:52:29 +0100 Received: from b06cxnps4074.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (9.149.109.196) by e06smtp13.uk.ibm.com (192.168.101.143) with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted; Thu, 13 Apr 2017 11:52:26 +0100 Received: from d06av25.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (d06av25.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com [9.149.105.61]) by b06cxnps4074.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id v3DAqQSn37486650; Thu, 13 Apr 2017 10:52:26 GMT Received: from d06av25.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id D4BF111C04C; Thu, 13 Apr 2017 11:51:42 +0100 (BST) Received: from d06av25.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id B568911C064; Thu, 13 Apr 2017 11:51:42 +0100 (BST) Received: from oc1027705133.ibm.com (unknown [9.152.212.162]) by d06av25.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS; Thu, 13 Apr 2017 11:51:42 +0100 (BST) From: Andreas Arnez To: Simon Marchi Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/9] Add test for modifiable DWARF locations References: <1491586736-21296-1-git-send-email-arnez@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <1491586736-21296-2-git-send-email-arnez@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2017 10:52:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: (Simon Marchi's message of "Thu, 13 Apr 2017 00:00:37 -0400") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.1 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00 x-cbid: 17041310-0012-0000-0000-0000050A745B X-IBM-AV-DETECTION: SAVI=unused REMOTE=unused XFE=unused x-cbparentid: 17041310-0013-0000-0000-0000180AE9C5 Message-Id: X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10432:,, definitions=2017-04-13_10:,, signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0 spamscore=0 suspectscore=0 malwarescore=0 phishscore=0 adultscore=0 bulkscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1702020001 definitions=main-1704130090 X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2017-04/txt/msg00415.txt.bz2 On Thu, Apr 13 2017, Simon Marchi wrote: > To be honest, I didn't know what a DWARF piece was before, well, two hours > ago. I've spent some time reading about that, including your write-up on > the problem [1] (very informative, thanks) and the implementation of > read_pieced_value. I can't say I have a very good grasp on the problem > you are tackling, but I got enough to understand all the lines in this > patch, and it looks good to me. Thanks for your interest in this topic; very much appreciated. The more people look at this, the better our chance of getting it right this time. > It will probably take someone with more experience about this stuff than > me to review the more intricate parts of the series, but I'll keep on > reading when I have time, even if it's just for my own knowledge/enjoyment > :). Although while going through read_pieced_value line by line, I've > found some areas that could be improved. I suspect that there might be > some overlap with some of the following patches of your series, so I might > be able to understand and review those. Yeah, the follow-up patches rewrite most of read/write_pieced_value. -- Andreas