Re: gdb and dlopen

[Kevin Buettner <kevinb@cygnus.com>]

On Nov 19,  2:16pm, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:

> > After I proposed the above idea, Peter Schauer emailed me privately
> > and noted that my idea would "break setting breakpoints in global
> > object constructor code in shared libraries."  He goes on to say
> > that the "reenable breakpoint logic after every shlib load currently
> > takes care of this."
> > 
> > So, it looks like you've also noticed one of the concerns that Peter
> > had regarding my idea.
> 
> Yes.  I don't know what we can really do about this - besides
> decreasing the total memory traffic for an update, which I think would
> be wise.  Among other possibilities, do you have any comment on my
> suggestion for setting inferior memory to be cached by default if not
> otherwise specified?  Currently we default to uncached, which is safer,
> but I can't think of many examples where it would be a problem to
> cache.

Are you sure caching will help?  The cache has to be invalidated every
time GDB stops, right?

If current_sos() is refetching some bit of memory more than once per
invocation, then perhaps this problem should be solved by some other
means?

Kevin