From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 40835 invoked by alias); 6 May 2015 19:32:16 -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 40823 invoked by uid 89); 6 May 2015 19:32:16 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-3.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,KAM_LAZY_DOMAIN_SECURITY,SPF_HELO_PASS,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD autolearn=no 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, 06 May 2015 19:32:14 +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 (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id t46JWCDV001443 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=FAIL) for ; Wed, 6 May 2015 15:32:13 -0400 Received: from host1.jankratochvil.net (ovpn-116-27.ams2.redhat.com [10.36.116.27]) by int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id t46JW8Jo024650 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Wed, 6 May 2015 15:32:11 -0400 Date: Wed, 06 May 2015 19:32:00 -0000 From: Jan Kratochvil To: Pedro Alves Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org, Phil Muldoon Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 11/11] RFC only: compile: Use also inferior munmap Message-ID: <20150506193208.GA18439@host1.jankratochvil.net> References: <20150503140647.18583.2012.stgit@host1.jankratochvil.net> <20150503140815.18583.29612.stgit@host1.jankratochvil.net> <554A3181.9040903@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <554A3181.9040903@redhat.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2015-05/txt/msg00130.txt.bz2 On Wed, 06 May 2015 17:21:37 +0200, Pedro Alves wrote: > On 05/03/2015 03:08 PM, Jan Kratochvil wrote: > > I believe later patches will be needed to introduce full control over keeping > > vs. discarding the injected module as being discussed in: > > compile: objfiles lifetime UI > > https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb/2015-04/msg00051.html > > Message-ID: <20150429135735.GA16974@host1.jankratochvil.net> > > This patch at least introduces code which will be needed for the part/cases of > > really freeing all the resources of an injected module. > > > > It is "RFC only" as given the patch as is it regresses GDB functionality. > > I don't which parts of this would cause regressions; For example the existing testsuite case - without its change it would PASS->FAIL. > it's helpful > when an RFC points out what is known to be hacky or patch bits that are known > to need to change. It's not obvious, at least to me. One can imagine many cases when the inferior can later reference the injected object's memory; although I agree for most of the 'print' expressions it will not happen. Maybe only the C 'char *' case https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb/2015-04/msg00054.html is the most visible one, C++ has better memory ownership/management in its objects. > That said, I skimmed it and it overall looks good. The stop_registers > bits looked surprising. My reaction was that I'd think that would be > something handled around save_infcall_suspend_state/restore_infcall_suspend_state, > though it's not clear to me. This was a minimal change how to make this patch working. I agree 'stop_registers' (also) looks as a hack to me, I will therefore try to make some pre/post cleanup patch if we can get rid of 'stop_registers', I have no idea. Thanks, Jan