public inbox for gdb-patches@sourceware.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* [PATCH] gdb/compile: Use std::filesystem::remove_all in cleanup
@ 2024-03-03 16:47 Lancelot SIX
  2024-03-08 16:27 ` Tom Tromey
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread
From: Lancelot SIX @ 2024-03-03 16:47 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: gdb-patches; +Cc: lsix, Lancelot SIX

In a previous review, I noticed that some code in gdb/compile/compile.c
could use c++17's `std::filesystem::remove_all` instead of using some
`system ("rm -rf ...");`.

This patch implements this.

Note that I use the noexcept overload of std::filesystem::remove_all and
explicitly check for an error code.  This means that this code called
during the cleanup procedure cannot throw, and does not risk preventing
other cleanup functions to be called.

Tested on x86_64-linux.

Bug: https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31420
Change-Id: If5668bf3e15e66c020e5c3b4fa999f861690e4cf
---
 gdb/compile/compile.c | 16 +++++++---------
 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)

diff --git a/gdb/compile/compile.c b/gdb/compile/compile.c
index 27cff2553ee..45452f19abb 100644
--- a/gdb/compile/compile.c
+++ b/gdb/compile/compile.c
@@ -40,7 +40,9 @@
 #include "osabi.h"
 #include "gdbsupport/gdb_wait.h"
 #include "valprint.h"
+#include <filesystem>
 #include <optional>
+#include <system_error>
 #include "gdbsupport/gdb_unlinker.h"
 #include "gdbsupport/pathstuff.h"
 #include "gdbsupport/scoped_ignore_signal.h"
@@ -450,15 +452,11 @@ get_compile_file_tempdir (void)
   tempdir_name = xstrdup (tempdir_name);
   add_final_cleanup ([] ()
     {
-      char *zap;
-      int wstat;
-
-      gdb_assert (startswith (tempdir_name, TMP_PREFIX));
-      zap = concat ("rm -rf ", tempdir_name, (char *) NULL);
-      wstat = system (zap);
-      if (wstat == -1 || !WIFEXITED (wstat) || WEXITSTATUS (wstat) != 0)
-	warning (_("Could not remove temporary directory %s"), tempdir_name);
-      XDELETEVEC (zap);
+      std::error_code error;
+      if (std::filesystem::remove_all (tempdir_name, error)
+	  == static_cast<std::uintmax_t> (-1))
+	warning (_("Could not remove temporary directory %s (%s)"),
+		 tempdir_name, error.message ().c_str ());
     });
   return tempdir_name;
 }

base-commit: 90f8d97c8efa75f7f019b868eca9c626bc35203d
-- 
2.34.1


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH] gdb/compile: Use std::filesystem::remove_all in cleanup
  2024-03-03 16:47 [PATCH] gdb/compile: Use std::filesystem::remove_all in cleanup Lancelot SIX
@ 2024-03-08 16:27 ` Tom Tromey
  2024-04-03 12:56   ` Lancelot SIX
  2024-04-03 14:37   ` Tom de Vries
  0 siblings, 2 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: Tom Tromey @ 2024-03-08 16:27 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Lancelot SIX; +Cc: gdb-patches, lsix

>>>>> "Lancelot" == Lancelot SIX <lancelot.six@amd.com> writes:

Lancelot> In a previous review, I noticed that some code in gdb/compile/compile.c
Lancelot> could use c++17's `std::filesystem::remove_all` instead of using some
Lancelot> `system ("rm -rf ...");`.

Lancelot> This patch implements this.

Lancelot> Note that I use the noexcept overload of std::filesystem::remove_all and
Lancelot> explicitly check for an error code.  This means that this code called
Lancelot> during the cleanup procedure cannot throw, and does not risk preventing
Lancelot> other cleanup functions to be called.

Lancelot> Tested on x86_64-linux.

Lancelot> Bug: https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31420
Lancelot> Change-Id: If5668bf3e15e66c020e5c3b4fa999f861690e4cf

Thank you.  I think this is ok.

There might be some risk that there's a compiler that implements C++17
but not std::filesystem.  If this happens I suppose we can either
consider simply rejecting that compiler, or alternatively, revert this
patch.

Approved-By: Tom Tromey <tom@tromey.com>

Tom

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH] gdb/compile: Use std::filesystem::remove_all in cleanup
  2024-03-08 16:27 ` Tom Tromey
@ 2024-04-03 12:56   ` Lancelot SIX
  2024-04-03 14:37   ` Tom de Vries
  1 sibling, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: Lancelot SIX @ 2024-04-03 12:56 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Tom Tromey; +Cc: gdb-patches, lsix

> Thank you.  I think this is ok.
> 
> There might be some risk that there's a compiler that implements C++17
> but not std::filesystem.  If this happens I suppose we can either
> consider simply rejecting that compiler, or alternatively, revert this
> patch.
> 
> Approved-By: Tom Tromey <tom@tromey.com>
> 
> Tom

I have just pushed this patch.  If it turns out that this causes any 
issue for some configuration, I'll revert the patch.

Best,
Lancelot.

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH] gdb/compile: Use std::filesystem::remove_all in cleanup
  2024-03-08 16:27 ` Tom Tromey
  2024-04-03 12:56   ` Lancelot SIX
@ 2024-04-03 14:37   ` Tom de Vries
  2024-04-03 14:47     ` Lancelot SIX
  1 sibling, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread
From: Tom de Vries @ 2024-04-03 14:37 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Tom Tromey, Lancelot SIX; +Cc: gdb-patches, lsix

On 3/8/24 17:27, Tom Tromey wrote:
>>>>>> "Lancelot" == Lancelot SIX <lancelot.six@amd.com> writes:
> 
> Lancelot> In a previous review, I noticed that some code in gdb/compile/compile.c
> Lancelot> could use c++17's `std::filesystem::remove_all` instead of using some
> Lancelot> `system ("rm -rf ...");`.
> 
> Lancelot> This patch implements this.
> 
> Lancelot> Note that I use the noexcept overload of std::filesystem::remove_all and
> Lancelot> explicitly check for an error code.  This means that this code called
> Lancelot> during the cleanup procedure cannot throw, and does not risk preventing
> Lancelot> other cleanup functions to be called.
> 
> Lancelot> Tested on x86_64-linux.
> 
> Lancelot> Bug: https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31420
> Lancelot> Change-Id: If5668bf3e15e66c020e5c3b4fa999f861690e4cf
> 
> Thank you.  I think this is ok.
> 
> There might be some risk that there's a compiler that implements C++17
> but not std::filesystem.  If this happens I suppose we can either
> consider simply rejecting that compiler, or alternatively, revert this
> patch.

This broke the build for me with gcc 7.5.0, which apparently falls into 
the category of "mostly implements C++17 but not std::filesystem".

As we can see here ( https://gcc.gnu.org/gcc-8/changes.html#cxx ) 
support was added in gcc 8.

Thanks,
- Tom


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH] gdb/compile: Use std::filesystem::remove_all in cleanup
  2024-04-03 14:37   ` Tom de Vries
@ 2024-04-03 14:47     ` Lancelot SIX
  2024-04-03 14:51       ` Tom de Vries
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread
From: Lancelot SIX @ 2024-04-03 14:47 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Tom de Vries, Tom Tromey; +Cc: gdb-patches, lsix

> 
> This broke the build for me with gcc 7.5.0, which apparently falls into
> the category of "mostly implements C++17 but not std::filesystem".
> 

Sorry about that, I have sent 
https://sourceware.org/pipermail/gdb-patches/2024-April/207760.html to 
revert that change.  At least, we know it is best to stay away from 
std::filesystem for now.

Best,
Lancelot.

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH] gdb/compile: Use std::filesystem::remove_all in cleanup
  2024-04-03 14:47     ` Lancelot SIX
@ 2024-04-03 14:51       ` Tom de Vries
  2024-04-03 17:08         ` Andrew Pinski
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread
From: Tom de Vries @ 2024-04-03 14:51 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Lancelot SIX, Tom Tromey; +Cc: gdb-patches, lsix

On 4/3/24 16:47, Lancelot SIX wrote:
>>
>> This broke the build for me with gcc 7.5.0, which apparently falls into
>> the category of "mostly implements C++17 but not std::filesystem".
>>
> 
> Sorry about that, I have sent 
> https://sourceware.org/pipermail/gdb-patches/2024-April/207760.html to 
> revert that change.  At least, we know it is best to stay away from 
> std::filesystem for now.
> 

I wonder if there is a case for conditionally enabling this.  That would 
ensure that the work is not lost, as well as used when using gcc >=8.

Thanks,
- Tom



^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH] gdb/compile: Use std::filesystem::remove_all in cleanup
  2024-04-03 14:51       ` Tom de Vries
@ 2024-04-03 17:08         ` Andrew Pinski
  2024-04-04  7:40           ` Lancelot SIX
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread
From: Andrew Pinski @ 2024-04-03 17:08 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Tom de Vries; +Cc: Lancelot SIX, Tom Tromey, gdb-patches, lsix

On Wed, Apr 3, 2024 at 7:51 AM Tom de Vries <tdevries@suse.de> wrote:
>
> On 4/3/24 16:47, Lancelot SIX wrote:
> >>
> >> This broke the build for me with gcc 7.5.0, which apparently falls into
> >> the category of "mostly implements C++17 but not std::filesystem".
> >>
> >
> > Sorry about that, I have sent
> > https://sourceware.org/pipermail/gdb-patches/2024-April/207760.html to
> > revert that change.  At least, we know it is best to stay away from
> > std::filesystem for now.
> >
>
> I wonder if there is a case for conditionally enabling this.  That would
> ensure that the work is not lost, as well as used when using gcc >=8.

Let me add even though support was added for GCC 8, the functions are
in included in libstdc++fs.a rather than the standard
libstdc++.so/libstdc++.a.
It was added to libstdc++ in GCC 9. So if you add this conditionally,
you either need to do a feature test that does a link too or have one
that adds libstdc++fs.a if not found in the standard library.

Thanks,
Andrew

>
> Thanks,
> - Tom
>
>

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH] gdb/compile: Use std::filesystem::remove_all in cleanup
  2024-04-03 17:08         ` Andrew Pinski
@ 2024-04-04  7:40           ` Lancelot SIX
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: Lancelot SIX @ 2024-04-04  7:40 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Andrew Pinski, Tom de Vries; +Cc: Tom Tromey, gdb-patches, lsix

>> I wonder if there is a case for conditionally enabling this.  That would
>> ensure that the work is not lost, as well as used when using gcc >=8.
> 
> Let me add even though support was added for GCC 8, the functions are
> in included in libstdc++fs.a rather than the standard
> libstdc++.so/libstdc++.a.
> It was added to libstdc++ in GCC 9. So if you add this conditionally,
> you either need to do a feature test that does a link too or have one
> that adds libstdc++fs.a if not found in the standard library.
> 
> Thanks,
> Andrew
> 
Thanks for the input.

We did discuss briefly using "-libstdc++fs" on IRC, thanks for the 
precision regarding where it is required. As gcc-7.5 seems to still be 
used to build gdb, it looks like we will stay away from std::filesystem 
for now.

Thanks,
Lancelot.

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread

end of thread, other threads:[~2024-04-04  7:40 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 8+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2024-03-03 16:47 [PATCH] gdb/compile: Use std::filesystem::remove_all in cleanup Lancelot SIX
2024-03-08 16:27 ` Tom Tromey
2024-04-03 12:56   ` Lancelot SIX
2024-04-03 14:37   ` Tom de Vries
2024-04-03 14:47     ` Lancelot SIX
2024-04-03 14:51       ` Tom de Vries
2024-04-03 17:08         ` Andrew Pinski
2024-04-04  7:40           ` Lancelot SIX

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).