From: Thiago Jung Bauermann <thiago.bauermann@linaro.org>
To: Simon Marchi <simark@simark.ca>
Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org, Luis Machado <luis.machado@arm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 4/6] gdbserver/linux-aarch64: When thread stops, update its target description
Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2022 04:30:00 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87bkoqgz7b.fsf@linaro.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <3539acb1-462d-62e3-5a70-40786942c325@simark.ca>
Simon Marchi <simark@simark.ca> writes:
>> diff --git a/gdbserver/linux-aarch64-low.cc b/gdbserver/linux-aarch64-low.cc
>> index cab4fc0a4674..786ce4071279 100644
>> --- a/gdbserver/linux-aarch64-low.cc
>> +++ b/gdbserver/linux-aarch64-low.cc
>> @@ -99,6 +99,9 @@ protected:
>>
>> void low_arch_setup () override;
>>
>> + gdb::optional<const struct target_desc *>
>> + arch_update_tdesc (const thread_info *thread) override;
>
> I'm all for using optional to be clear and explicit in general, but
> unless an empty optional and an optional wrapping nullptr are both valid
> and have different meanings (which doesn't seem, to be the case here), I
> wouldn't recommend wrapping a pointer in an optional.
>
> Pointers have a dedicated value for "no value", that is well understood
> by everyone. And then, it does create the possibility of returning an
> optional wrapping nullptr, which typically won't be a legitimate value.
> So it's just one more thing to worry about.
I like optional because it forces the caller to check that the result is
valid before using it, whereas with an unwrapped pointer it's easy to
accidentally do a null pointer dereference.
I hadn't considered the situation of an optional wrapping a nullptr
though. Interesting point. For v3 I changed the function to return an
unwrapped pointer and check for nullptr in the caller.
>> @@ -840,8 +845,16 @@ aarch64_target::low_arch_setup ()
>> {
>> struct aarch64_features features
>> = aarch64_get_arch_features (current_thread);
>> + const target_desc *tdesc = aarch64_linux_read_description (features);
>>
>> - current_process ()->tdesc = aarch64_linux_read_description (features);
>> + /* Only SVE-enabled inferiors need per-thread target descriptions. */
>> + if (features.vq > 0)
>> + {
>> + current_thread->tdesc = tdesc;
>> + current_process ()->priv->arch_private->has_sve = true;
>> + }
>
> Is it not possible for a process to start with SVE disabled (vq == 0) and
> have some threads enable it later?
Thank you Luis for clarifying this point.
>> @@ -853,6 +866,28 @@ aarch64_target::low_arch_setup ()
>> aarch64_linux_get_debug_reg_capacity (lwpid_of (current_thread));
>> }
>>
>> +/* Implementation of linux target ops method "arch_update_tdesc". */
>> +
>> +gdb::optional<const struct target_desc *>
>> +aarch64_target::arch_update_tdesc (const thread_info *thread)
>> +{
>> + /* Only processes using SVE need to update the thread's target description. */
>> + if (!get_thread_process (thread)->priv->arch_private->has_sve)
>> + return {};
>> +
>> + const struct aarch64_features features = aarch64_get_arch_features (thread);
>> + const struct target_desc *tdesc = aarch64_linux_read_description (features);
>> +
>> + if (tdesc == thread->tdesc)
>> + return {};
>> +
>> + /* Adjust the register sets we should use for this particular set of
>> + features. */
>> + aarch64_adjust_register_sets(features);
>> +
>> + return tdesc;
>
> Naming nit: I don't think we need "update" in the method name, there's
> no "updating component" to it AFAICT. It's basically "get this thread's
> tdesc if for some reason it differents from the process-wide we have".
> So, I don't know, "get_thread_tdesc" or just "thread_tdesc".
That's true. I renamed the method to “get_thread_tdesc”. Thanks for the
suggestion.
>> @@ -2348,6 +2354,18 @@ linux_process_target::filter_event (int lwpid, int wstat)
>> return;
>> }
>> }
>> + else
>> + {
>> + /* Give the arch code an opportunity to update the thread's target
>> + description. */
>> + gdb::optional<const struct target_desc *> new_tdesc
>> + = arch_update_tdesc (thread);
>> + if (new_tdesc.has_value ())
>> + {
>> + regcache_release ();
>
> Hmm, regcache_release frees the regcache for all threads. Can we free
> the regcache only for this thread?
Indeed. regcache_release simply calls the static function
“free_register_cache_thread” on all threads, so for v3 I made it public
and called it just for this thread.
--
Thiago
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-11-29 4:30 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 45+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-11-26 2:04 [PATCH v2 0/6] gdbserver improvements for AArch64 SVE support Thiago Jung Bauermann
2022-11-26 2:04 ` [PATCH v2 1/6] gdbserver: Add asserts in register_size and register_data functions Thiago Jung Bauermann
2022-11-28 11:51 ` Luis Machado
2022-11-29 2:53 ` Thiago Jung Bauermann
2022-11-28 14:48 ` Simon Marchi
2022-11-28 14:53 ` Simon Marchi
2022-11-29 2:52 ` Thiago Jung Bauermann
2022-11-29 2:43 ` Thiago Jung Bauermann
2022-11-26 2:04 ` [PATCH v2 2/6] gdbserver: Add PID parameter to linux_get_auxv and linux_get_hwcap Thiago Jung Bauermann
2022-11-28 11:50 ` Luis Machado
2022-11-28 15:01 ` Simon Marchi
2022-11-29 3:10 ` Thiago Jung Bauermann
2022-11-28 15:07 ` Simon Marchi
2022-11-28 15:20 ` Luis Machado
2022-11-29 3:17 ` Thiago Jung Bauermann
2022-11-26 2:04 ` [PATCH v2 3/6] gdbserver/linux-aarch64: Factor out function to get aarch64_features Thiago Jung Bauermann
2022-11-28 11:54 ` Luis Machado
2022-11-29 3:19 ` Thiago Jung Bauermann
2022-11-28 15:12 ` Simon Marchi
2022-11-29 3:26 ` Thiago Jung Bauermann
2022-11-26 2:04 ` [PATCH v2 4/6] gdbserver/linux-aarch64: When thread stops, update its target description Thiago Jung Bauermann
2022-11-28 12:06 ` Luis Machado
2022-11-29 3:59 ` Thiago Jung Bauermann
2022-11-28 15:47 ` Simon Marchi
2022-11-28 16:01 ` Luis Machado
2022-11-28 16:07 ` Simon Marchi
2022-11-29 4:30 ` Thiago Jung Bauermann [this message]
2022-11-26 2:04 ` [PATCH v2 5/6] gdb/aarch64: Factor out most of the thread_architecture method Thiago Jung Bauermann
2022-11-28 12:09 ` Luis Machado
2022-11-29 4:32 ` Thiago Jung Bauermann
2022-11-28 16:09 ` Simon Marchi
2022-11-29 4:33 ` Thiago Jung Bauermann
2022-11-26 2:04 ` [PATCH v2 6/6] gdb/aarch64: Detect vector length changes when debugging remotely Thiago Jung Bauermann
2022-11-28 13:27 ` Luis Machado
2022-12-01 1:15 ` Thiago Jung Bauermann
2022-11-28 16:36 ` Simon Marchi
2022-12-01 3:16 ` Thiago Jung Bauermann
2022-12-01 8:32 ` Luis Machado
2022-12-01 16:16 ` Simon Marchi
2022-11-30 8:43 ` Luis Machado
2022-12-05 22:37 ` Thiago Jung Bauermann
2022-12-07 17:05 ` Luis Machado
2022-12-07 19:25 ` Simon Marchi
2022-12-07 23:01 ` Luis Machado
2022-12-09 2:20 ` Thiago Jung Bauermann
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=87bkoqgz7b.fsf@linaro.org \
--to=thiago.bauermann@linaro.org \
--cc=gdb-patches@sourceware.org \
--cc=luis.machado@arm.com \
--cc=simark@simark.ca \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
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).