From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 22251 invoked by alias); 26 Jun 2009 19:11:05 -0000 Received: (qmail 22234 invoked by uid 22791); 26 Jun 2009 19:11:04 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mx2.redhat.com (HELO mx2.redhat.com) (66.187.237.31) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Fri, 26 Jun 2009 19:10:58 +0000 Received: from int-mx2.corp.redhat.com (int-mx2.corp.redhat.com [172.16.27.26]) by mx2.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n5QJ8tRo023545; Fri, 26 Jun 2009 15:08:55 -0400 Received: from ns3.rdu.redhat.com (ns3.rdu.redhat.com [10.11.255.199]) by int-mx2.corp.redhat.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id n5QJ8sha006349; Fri, 26 Jun 2009 15:08:55 -0400 Received: from opsy.redhat.com (vpn-225-10.phx2.redhat.com [10.3.225.10]) by ns3.rdu.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n5QJ8s7v031867; Fri, 26 Jun 2009 15:08:54 -0400 Received: by opsy.redhat.com (Postfix, from userid 500) id 3746D3785DB; Fri, 26 Jun 2009 13:08:53 -0600 (MDT) To: Pedro Alves Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [RFC] [1/2] First cut at multi-executable support. References: <200906151621.57104.pedro@codesourcery.com> <200906251541.04243.pedro@codesourcery.com> From: Tom Tromey Reply-To: tromey@redhat.com Date: Fri, 26 Jun 2009 19:11:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: <200906251541.04243.pedro@codesourcery.com> (Pedro Alves's message of "Thu\, 25 Jun 2009 15\:41\:03 +0100") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii 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: 2009-06/txt/msg00753.txt.bz2 >>>>> "Pedro" == Pedro Alves writes: Pedro> We could split an objfile in two, with the shared parts not having a Pedro> reference to a symbol space. [...] Pedro> At a high distance, this sounds feasible to me, but, looking at the Pedro> code, this looks like a huge effort, and I'm sure I'm missing a lot Pedro> of complications. Yeah. I just find it helpful to have an overview of the wish-list. Tom> This seems like another possible performance problem; lazily reading Tom> it would be friendlier. In a scenario like the "make" case, I would Tom> assume that most inferiors will not actually require any user Tom> attention, and time and memory spent on their debuginfo is just Tom> wasted. Pedro> Yeah, I know you have patches for this. ;-) Hah, yeah, I was kind of plugging my patch. I'm hoping that we can actually push this lazy reading idea much further -- with my patch, the pause when gdb actually goes to read the debuginfo can be rather noticeable on occasion. But, this is vague dreaming, I don't really know how to implement full laziness yet. Tom> "Program exited normally." could also use some love... at least some Tom> info about the program, and maybe removing the excess newlines? Pedro> For my own testing, I've tweaked those messages to include the Pedro> process id. It's just mad otherwise. However, it has been Pedro> one of my goals to not change much how the single-inferior case Pedro> works/outputs as a first incremental step. I'm sure there will Pedro> be different opinions on to what GDB should output, so this avoids Pedro> such discussions for now :-). Practical plan :-) Tom> + ui_out_table_header (uiout, 1, ui_left, "current", ""); Tom> For some reason I did not think of leaving the header empty when I did Tom> this for "info inferiors". I like this better... since you're also Tom> touching print_inferior, how about just making that change? Pedro> But I had already. :-) Or, do you mean to split that change out Pedro> of the patch? I can do that. I think that would be good idea. I thought your patch had this change in one place but not "info inferiors". Maybe I missed it. Anyway, don't worry about it, I'll mark this note and go back and check once everything goes in. Pedro> I'm now working on cleaning up a bit the patch and fixing the Pedro> random crashes I mentioned, and I'll be posting an updated Pedro> patch soon. I'm looking forward to it. Tom