From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 25508 invoked by alias); 15 Dec 2014 20:41:47 -0000 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 Received: (qmail 25491 invoked by uid 89); 15 Dec 2014 20:41:46 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.7 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 X-HELO: rock.gnat.com Received: from rock.gnat.com (HELO rock.gnat.com) (205.232.38.15) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with (AES256-SHA encrypted) ESMTPS; Mon, 15 Dec 2014 20:41:45 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by filtered-rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 541F711658C; Mon, 15 Dec 2014 15:41:43 -0500 (EST) Received: from rock.gnat.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (rock.gnat.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id qy1wn0ApYfwE; Mon, 15 Dec 2014 15:41:43 -0500 (EST) Received: from joel.gnat.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 35E9D1163B2; Mon, 15 Dec 2014 15:41:43 -0500 (EST) Received: by joel.gnat.com (Postfix, from userid 1000) id A64EF40166; Mon, 15 Dec 2014 15:41:43 -0500 (EST) Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2014 20:41:00 -0000 From: Joel Brobecker To: "H.J. Lu" Cc: Jan Kratochvil , GDB Subject: Re: [commit 7.8] [patch+7.8] Fix 7.8 regression: resolve_dynamic_struct: Assertion `TYPE_NFIELDS (type) > 0' (PR 17642) Message-ID: <20141215204143.GD5457@adacore.com> References: <20141125195444.GA3400@host2.jankratochvil.net> <20141213142351.GG5457@adacore.com> <20141215150609.GA4229@adacore.com> <20141215191244.GA23577@host2.jankratochvil.net> <20141215193658.GC5457@adacore.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) X-SW-Source: 2014-12/txt/msg00418.txt.bz2 > > This is a fairly big patch... > > 1. How bad is performance without it? > > It was very bad, like > 100x slower. OK, but 100x slower than 1usec is still unnoticeable. When did you start noticing it, for what kind of program (size?), and what type of delay were you seeing? Also, is that a regression compared to 7.7? The idea is that, if it's just a second or two, or even ten, that's still quite bearable, and unless you are absolutely sure that your patch is safe, perhaps we should pass... > > 2. Can you find a binutils maintainer that will vouch that > > this patch is 100% safe? > > As the x86 binutils maintainer, do I count? Absolutely. I just need someone who knows the code well enough to be trusted with its maintainance to stand behind the code and confirm that it is considered safe. In this case, I need extra safe, considering the fact that this is a .2 release. I hope I've described my concerns well enough for you to make the decision. Now that I have explained my thought process, I feel you're more qualified to make an informed decision now. Your call. Please remember that, if you do push it to 7.8, you'll need a PR associated to is so you can document the fix in the release wiki page (see fixes in GDB 7.8.2): https://sourceware.org/gdb/wiki/GDB_7.8_Release -- Joel