* [PATCH 2/6] gdbserver: remove function abbrevs from debugging text
@ 2013-12-17 21:43 Doug Evans
2013-12-18 0:42 ` Yao Qi
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Doug Evans @ 2013-12-17 21:43 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gdb-patches
Hi.
This patch removes the function abbreviations from the debugging output.
In one example it's wrong (GPS vs get_detach_signal), and I rarely
keep in cache the translation to function name.
2013-12-17 Doug Evans <dje@google.com>
* linux-low.c (linux_kill_one_lwp): Replace LKL with linux_kill_one_lwp
in debugging printf.
(get_detach_signal): Replace GPS with get_detach_signal in debugging
printf. Remove extraneous "lwp" in output.
(cancel_breakpoint): Replace CB with get_detach_signal in debugging
printf.
(select_event_lwp): Replace SEL with select_event_lwp in debugging
printf.
---
gdb/gdbserver/linux-low.c | 25 ++++++++++++++-----------
1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
diff --git a/gdb/gdbserver/linux-low.c b/gdb/gdbserver/linux-low.c
index 770ee16..464aaf0 100644
--- a/gdb/gdbserver/linux-low.c
+++ b/gdb/gdbserver/linux-low.c
@@ -899,7 +899,7 @@ linux_kill_one_lwp (struct lwp_info *lwp)
kill (pid, SIGKILL);
if (debug_threads)
fprintf (stderr,
- "LKL: kill (SIGKILL) %s, 0, 0 (%s)\n",
+ "linux_kill_one_lwp: kill (SIGKILL) %s, 0, 0 (%s)\n",
target_pid_to_str (ptid_of (lwp)),
errno ? strerror (errno) : "OK");
@@ -907,7 +907,7 @@ linux_kill_one_lwp (struct lwp_info *lwp)
ptrace (PTRACE_KILL, pid, (PTRACE_TYPE_ARG3) 0, (PTRACE_TYPE_ARG4) 0);
if (debug_threads)
fprintf (stderr,
- "LKL: PTRACE_KILL %s, 0, 0 (%s)\n",
+ "linux_kill_one_lwp: PTRACE_KILL %s, 0, 0 (%s)\n",
target_pid_to_str (ptid_of (lwp)),
errno ? strerror (errno) : "OK");
}
@@ -1032,7 +1032,8 @@ get_detach_signal (struct thread_info *thread)
{
if (debug_threads)
fprintf (stderr,
- "GPS: lwp %s hasn't stopped: no pending signal\n",
+ "get_detach_signal: %s hasn't stopped: "
+ "no pending signal\n",
target_pid_to_str (ptid_of (lp)));
return 0;
}
@@ -1042,7 +1043,7 @@ get_detach_signal (struct thread_info *thread)
{
if (debug_threads)
fprintf (stderr,
- "GPS: lwp %s had stopped with extended "
+ "get_detach_signal: %s had stopped with extended "
"status: no pending signal\n",
target_pid_to_str (ptid_of (lp)));
return 0;
@@ -1054,7 +1055,8 @@ get_detach_signal (struct thread_info *thread)
{
if (debug_threads)
fprintf (stderr,
- "GPS: lwp %s had signal %s, but it is in nopass state\n",
+ "get_detach_signal: %s had signal %s, but it is "
+ "in nopass state\n",
target_pid_to_str (ptid_of (lp)),
gdb_signal_to_string (signo));
return 0;
@@ -1067,7 +1069,7 @@ get_detach_signal (struct thread_info *thread)
{
if (debug_threads)
fprintf (stderr,
- "GPS: lwp %s had signal %s, "
+ "get_detach_signal: %s had signal %s, "
"but we don't know if we should pass it. Default to not.\n",
target_pid_to_str (ptid_of (lp)),
gdb_signal_to_string (signo));
@@ -1077,7 +1079,8 @@ get_detach_signal (struct thread_info *thread)
{
if (debug_threads)
fprintf (stderr,
- "GPS: lwp %s has pending signal %s: delivering it.\n",
+ "get_detach_signal: %s has pending signal %s: "
+ "delivering it.\n",
target_pid_to_str (ptid_of (lp)),
gdb_signal_to_string (signo));
@@ -1735,7 +1738,7 @@ cancel_breakpoint (struct lwp_info *lwp)
{
if (debug_threads)
fprintf (stderr,
- "CB: Push back breakpoint for %s\n",
+ "cancel_breakpoint: Push back breakpoint for %s\n",
target_pid_to_str (ptid_of (lwp)));
/* Back up the PC if necessary. */
@@ -1753,7 +1756,7 @@ cancel_breakpoint (struct lwp_info *lwp)
{
if (debug_threads)
fprintf (stderr,
- "CB: No breakpoint found at %s for [%s]\n",
+ "cancel_breakpoint: No breakpoint found at %s for [%s]\n",
paddress (lwp->stop_pc),
target_pid_to_str (ptid_of (lwp)));
}
@@ -2083,7 +2086,7 @@ select_event_lwp (struct lwp_info **orig_lp)
{
if (debug_threads)
fprintf (stderr,
- "SEL: Select single-step %s\n",
+ "select_event_lwp: Select single-step %s\n",
target_pid_to_str (ptid_of (event_lp)));
}
else
@@ -2100,7 +2103,7 @@ select_event_lwp (struct lwp_info **orig_lp)
if (debug_threads && num_events > 1)
fprintf (stderr,
- "SEL: Found %d SIGTRAP events, selecting #%d\n",
+ "select_event_lwp: Found %d SIGTRAP events, selecting #%d\n",
num_events, random_selector);
event_lp = (struct lwp_info *) find_inferior (&all_lwps,
--
1.8.5.1
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 2/6] gdbserver: remove function abbrevs from debugging text
2013-12-17 21:43 [PATCH 2/6] gdbserver: remove function abbrevs from debugging text Doug Evans
@ 2013-12-18 0:42 ` Yao Qi
2013-12-18 1:20 ` Doug Evans
2013-12-18 15:13 ` Tom Tromey
0 siblings, 2 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Yao Qi @ 2013-12-18 0:42 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Doug Evans; +Cc: gdb-patches
On 12/18/2013 05:43 AM, Doug Evans wrote:
> This patch removes the function abbreviations from the debugging output.
Function abbreviations are also mentioned in linux-nat debugging output.
IWBN to keep them consistent.
> In one example it's wrong (GPS vs get_detach_signal), and I rarely
> keep in cache the translation to function name.
The function names in debugging output will be out of sync as function
names are changed, unless macro __func__ is used. However, __func__
is defined in C99 and we are using C90 (?) in GDB.
--
Yao (é½å°§)
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 2/6] gdbserver: remove function abbrevs from debugging text
2013-12-18 0:42 ` Yao Qi
@ 2013-12-18 1:20 ` Doug Evans
2013-12-18 1:57 ` Yao Qi
2013-12-18 11:16 ` Pedro Alves
2013-12-18 15:13 ` Tom Tromey
1 sibling, 2 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Doug Evans @ 2013-12-18 1:20 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Yao Qi; +Cc: gdb-patches
On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 4:41 PM, Yao Qi <yao@codesourcery.com> wrote:
> On 12/18/2013 05:43 AM, Doug Evans wrote:
>> This patch removes the function abbreviations from the debugging output.
>
> Function abbreviations are also mentioned in linux-nat debugging output.
> IWBN to keep them consistent.
Sure. I'll submit a separate patch for that.
>> In one example it's wrong (GPS vs get_detach_signal), and I rarely
>> keep in cache the translation to function name.
>
> The function names in debugging output will be out of sync as function
> names are changed, unless macro __func__ is used. However, __func__
> is defined in C99 and we are using C90 (?) in GDB.
I think it's reasonable to do what we do for gdb_assert, namely just
punt on printing the name if the feature isn't present.
I see I missed at least one function with an abbreviated function name anyway.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 2/6] gdbserver: remove function abbrevs from debugging text
2013-12-18 1:20 ` Doug Evans
@ 2013-12-18 1:57 ` Yao Qi
2013-12-18 11:16 ` Pedro Alves
1 sibling, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Yao Qi @ 2013-12-18 1:57 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Doug Evans; +Cc: gdb-patches
On 12/18/2013 09:20 AM, Doug Evans wrote:
> I think it's reasonable to do what we do for gdb_assert, namely just
> punt on printing the name if the feature isn't present.
Agreed.
b.t.w, I didn't know gdb_assert uses __func__ before.
--
Yao (é½å°§)
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 2/6] gdbserver: remove function abbrevs from debugging text
2013-12-18 1:20 ` Doug Evans
2013-12-18 1:57 ` Yao Qi
@ 2013-12-18 11:16 ` Pedro Alves
1 sibling, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Pedro Alves @ 2013-12-18 11:16 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Doug Evans; +Cc: Yao Qi, gdb-patches
On 12/18/2013 01:20 AM, Doug Evans wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 4:41 PM, Yao Qi <yao@codesourcery.com> wrote:
>> On 12/18/2013 05:43 AM, Doug Evans wrote:
>>> This patch removes the function abbreviations from the debugging output.
>>
>> Function abbreviations are also mentioned in linux-nat debugging output.
>> IWBN to keep them consistent.
>
> Sure. I'll submit a separate patch for that.
>
>>> In one example it's wrong (GPS vs get_detach_signal), and I rarely
>>> keep in cache the translation to function name.
>>
>> The function names in debugging output will be out of sync as function
>> names are changed, unless macro __func__ is used. However, __func__
>> is defined in C99 and we are using C90 (?) in GDB.
>
> I think it's reasonable to do what we do for gdb_assert, namely just
> punt on printing the name if the feature isn't present.
Yeah. FAOD, I think using __PRETTY_FUNCTION__/__func__
would be great.
--
Pedro Alves
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 2/6] gdbserver: remove function abbrevs from debugging text
2013-12-18 0:42 ` Yao Qi
2013-12-18 1:20 ` Doug Evans
@ 2013-12-18 15:13 ` Tom Tromey
1 sibling, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Tom Tromey @ 2013-12-18 15:13 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Yao Qi; +Cc: gdb-patches
>>>>> "Yao" == Yao Qi <yao@codesourcery.com> writes:
Yao> The function names in debugging output will be out of sync as function
Yao> names are changed, unless macro __func__ is used. However, __func__
Yao> is defined in C99 and we are using C90 (?) in GDB.
FWIW we found out a while back that gdbserver actually relies on GNU C
-- see the ax_debug and ax_debug_1 defines in ax.c. And, BFD
unconditionally uses "long long" in spots. So while the rule is
officially that gdb is C89, in practice that isn't actually true.
Tom
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2013-12-18 15:13 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2013-12-17 21:43 [PATCH 2/6] gdbserver: remove function abbrevs from debugging text Doug Evans
2013-12-18 0:42 ` Yao Qi
2013-12-18 1:20 ` Doug Evans
2013-12-18 1:57 ` Yao Qi
2013-12-18 11:16 ` Pedro Alves
2013-12-18 15:13 ` Tom Tromey
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox