From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 19195 invoked by alias); 16 Jan 2014 18:54:19 -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 19182 invoked by uid 89); 16 Jan 2014 18:54:19 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.8 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_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 ESMTP; Thu, 16 Jan 2014 18:54:18 +0000 Received: from int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.23]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id s0GIsFgd032188 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Thu, 16 Jan 2014 13:54:15 -0500 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (ovpn01.gateway.prod.ext.ams2.redhat.com [10.39.146.11]) by int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id s0GIsDf0005951; Thu, 16 Jan 2014 13:54:14 -0500 Message-ID: <52D82AD5.7000306@redhat.com> Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2014 18:54:00 -0000 From: Pedro Alves User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130625 Thunderbird/17.0.7 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Doug Evans CC: Yao Qi , gdb-patches Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/6] gdbserver: Delimit debugging output for readability References: <52B1842F.5020401@redhat.com> <21205.55987.69477.892571@ruffy.mtv.corp.google.com> <52D81569.3080006@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2014-01/txt/msg00641.txt.bz2 On 01/16/2014 06:43 PM, Doug Evans wrote: > On Thu, Jan 16, 2014 at 9:22 AM, Pedro Alves wrote: > A counter-proposal is that no information is lost given that if PROG > isn't present you know it's gdbserver, and it makes the debugging > output consistent with the rest of gdbserver. > Otherwise "Consistency Is Good" is going to make me want to prepend > PROG to all gdbserver output, which I don't have a problem with, but > thought I'd double check. OK, I'll concede. Let's try going without. >>> diff --git a/gdb/gdbserver/utils.c b/gdb/gdbserver/utils.c >>> index eff4499..1ce5512 100644 >>> --- a/gdb/gdbserver/utils.c >>> +++ b/gdb/gdbserver/utils.c >> >> Could this new debug support code be put in a new file >> instead? E.g., gdbserver/debug.c ? > > It's a pretty-small file, and utils.c is kind of our collective > kitchen sink for such things. Well, I/we've been trying to stop kitchen sinks. It makes turning things into libraries much easier. See the "common" project wiki page, for example. Things grow into kitchen sinks little by little. Before you know it, the beast is huge. > I have no preference, just double checking that that's what you want. It is. >> It'd be nice if this and gdb_assert.h's version of the same were >> shared. That is, e.g., put this in common/common-utils.h instead, >> and make gdb_assert.h define ASSERT_FUNCTION as FUNCTION_NAME >> (or eliminate ASSERT_FUNCTION entirely). Are you planning on >> doing it? > > Done in v2. Thanks. -- Pedro Alves