From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 118346 invoked by alias); 29 Jul 2015 10:39:53 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 118333 invoked by uid 89); 29 Jul 2015 10:39:52 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-2.2 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,KAM_LAZY_DOMAIN_SECURITY,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 X-HELO: mx1.redhat.com Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with (AES256-GCM-SHA384 encrypted) ESMTPS; Wed, 29 Jul 2015 10:39:51 +0000 Received: from int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.22]) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3A800B1F8F; Wed, 29 Jul 2015 10:39:50 +0000 (UTC) Received: from blade.nx (ovpn-116-19.ams2.redhat.com [10.36.116.19]) by int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id t6TAdnKp032394; Wed, 29 Jul 2015 06:39:49 -0400 Received: by blade.nx (Postfix, from userid 1000) id C0355264F01; Wed, 29 Jul 2015 11:39:48 +0100 (BST) Date: Wed, 29 Jul 2015 10:39:00 -0000 From: Gary Benson To: Pedro Alves Cc: Doug Evans , Sandra Loosemore , "gdb@sourceware.org" , Jan Kratochvil Subject: Re: GDB now takes 4 minutes to start up with remote gdbserver target Message-ID: <20150729103948.GD19548@blade.nx> References: <55B1768E.9090309@codesourcery.com> <55B1A4FC.9010403@codesourcery.com> <20150724085244.GB22673@blade.nx> <55B7FEB2.9050608@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <55B7FEB2.9050608@redhat.com> X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2015-07/txt/msg00080.txt.bz2 Pedro Alves wrote: > On 07/28/2015 05:54 PM, Doug Evans wrote: > > On Fri, Jul 24, 2015 at 1:52 AM, Gary Benson wrote: > >>> (3) Once the "c" command is issued, there's nothing to inform the > >>> user exactly what GDB is doing or that this can be a very slow > >>> operation (e.g., with a progress bar). > >> > >> This is kind of a shortcoming of GDB in general. There was a similar > >> issue relating to tab-completion in programs with lots of symbols: > >> > >> https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11920 > >> > >> I don't have a good solution for this. > > > > I'm sure there are fine solutions. > > The problem is getting gdb to a point where > > good solutions fit in easily, without having to > > do something specific for each case. > > I agree. I worry much about lots of "smartness" at the last minute, > and then be stuck with it. The "target:" sysroot is simple to > explain and reason about. The new proposal, not so much. Agreed. I'm in no way pushing the series I posted, I made it more to turn what was previously a thought experiment into something more concrete. I should maybe have posted it as an RFC... > Also, with Aleksandar/Jan's gdbserver build-id validation series in > place, we may be able to come up with a different/better solution. Yes. Jan told me he was considering changing sysroot to a multiple- component path, with the default being something like "/:target:/". This should work really nicely, but it only makes sense with build-id validation (it's just too easy to get the wrong files otherwise). I'm assuming we can cope with the fact that the separator ":" appears in "target:" somehow :) > If resolving the interruptability and adding a suggestive warning > is deemed insufficient resolution (though I think we should try it > first), then I think it's too late to add too much magic, and we should > change the default sysroot back to "" by default. Users can still then > put "set sysroot target:" in .gdbinit with 7.10, and we can continue > addressing identified issues until "target:" (or something around it) > can be made the default, on master. I'm going to look at adding a warning. Note that reverting the sysroot back to "" is not exactly zero-risk given that GDB is now more aggressive in discovering executable filenames from remote targets. Cheers, Gary -- http://gbenson.net/