From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 14818 invoked by alias); 21 Jul 2011 18:15:29 -0000 Received: (qmail 14808 invoked by uid 22791); 21 Jul 2011 18:15:29 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.8 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Thu, 21 Jul 2011 18:15:09 +0000 Received: from int-mx02.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx02.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.12]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id p6LIF1LI028404 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Thu, 21 Jul 2011 14:15:01 -0400 Received: from psique ([10.3.112.15]) by int-mx02.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id p6LIEqgo004943; Thu, 21 Jul 2011 14:14:56 -0400 From: Sergio Durigan Junior To: Pedro Alves Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org, Jan Kratochvil Subject: Re: [PATCH] On-demand loading of shlib's debuginfo References: <20110720205313.GA2611@host1.jankratochvil.net> <201107211158.45196.pedro@codesourcery.com> Date: Thu, 21 Jul 2011 18:43:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: <201107211158.45196.pedro@codesourcery.com> (Pedro Alves's message of "Thu, 21 Jul 2011 11:58:44 +0100") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-IsSubscribed: yes 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: 2011-07/txt/msg00592.txt.bz2 Pedro Alves writes: > On Wednesday 20 July 2011 21:53:14, Jan Kratochvil wrote: >> On Tue, 19 Jul 2011 00:23:49 +0200, Sergio Durigan Junior wrote: >> > With that in mind, we decided to tackle this problem progressively, and the >> > first part of the solution is ready for submission. >> >> That is currently it still touches the solib files on disk for the purpose of >> solib_map_sections so that will be a different patch, looking forward. > > I had skimmed the patch only, and reserved commenting until I had > a chance of reading the patch carefuly and figuring it out > myself, but since you raise this... > > Is that the reason then that svr4_match_pc_solist goes through > the link map to map a PC to a so_list, instead of having a > generic implementation that matches the PC to the so_list's > loaded (bfd) sections (that is, just call solib_contains_address_p) ? > If so, it'd make more sense IMO to remove that from this patch, > and add it only along with a change that lazies mapping in the bfd > and its sections as well. I'm not sure how safe that will be. Thanks for the comments, both of you. After some chat with Jan, I have decided that I will work on the second part of this task, i.e., take care of solib_map_sections inside update_solib_list, and will only submit a new patch when it's done. Thank you, Sergio.