From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [170.10.133.124]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 863A7385417F for ; Fri, 10 Feb 2023 19:10:34 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 sourceware.org 863A7385417F Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=redhat.com DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1676056234; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=cKOGtKE/1hSOA3WhqJDPdg1Agb5NmWg5i1cAxe07278=; b=BjrulimlBKbHHBZSzBRgPjBpA1YMJyN8gXvbUKeaTnEY1bkk61LDp/xzIfZls237KCl75k wnym4ekSIpeC23o/7pb/qXptVjJpseuB6cc266VVgvuW+KxfMd4Eg8eqoj2NyQ8CzcRZMg dmnmTn4gMwXu7iTQQ6sjQAAYSMonetM= Received: from mail-qk1-f200.google.com (mail-qk1-f200.google.com [209.85.222.200]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.3, cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256) id us-mta-632-Ou-yyPGoN96RdK1mc5UQKA-1; Fri, 10 Feb 2023 14:10:32 -0500 X-MC-Unique: Ou-yyPGoN96RdK1mc5UQKA-1 Received: by mail-qk1-f200.google.com with SMTP id x14-20020a05620a14ae00b0072f7f0f356bso3867597qkj.1 for ; Fri, 10 Feb 2023 11:10:32 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=mime-version:message-id:date:references:in-reply-to:subject:to:from :x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=cKOGtKE/1hSOA3WhqJDPdg1Agb5NmWg5i1cAxe07278=; b=PWQy0M3CDNTbDzBLTSkKj1EQZVQrhoox/9hG02mDIp9T0E9T4ZcOc0uJ8feANt/uxG rB/JxBgCBK+3vFRCwIE1U/vrJ/AgzqjZwQK2iRGrIvArI8Q1foBCFv9DMD/imX9LBGyJ HIWBFkuHHtx9P7nBST1XNaa2bFKqW0Bfls2gplYCv8WwZZ5PzQELJkZzPcHSZj5toQh1 O3GuSG6R9ISYG5SCLhrCtrd3e2BSMwt8VT+kc2NuBp5H2xAnj09oXVc8cxr6k6WhBejk JmQCyZi54fY4xtvv2KiVCOq5BBdyMSpzdYpMm5978UBx+LVWXBj4dBi/vEHd9ZycX3ED yzEw== X-Gm-Message-State: AO0yUKUS6d64z0zlP8UpS4egWieWbFjWIdXNVtBdsRThRlKKiE6zTRY0 vq7OD+ZnQS9SPuapE0/S86c7ZRuYOud6sS6M3c/yAJbqlwp6RnU5GxEM4dhY49uWJMY+4gC2TBi LBq5P4Jg8RAWNsrW+N75HVToY4uY= X-Received: by 2002:a05:622a:14ca:b0:3b6:3260:fa1d with SMTP id u10-20020a05622a14ca00b003b63260fa1dmr30134476qtx.45.1676056232146; Fri, 10 Feb 2023 11:10:32 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Smtp-Source: AK7set9JkoGvAwqFAX1TKAX9VMW5oY16shYfc3YKK1R4evOVI8IB/YhIsu+7HQFtznUf1VMbvzLuhA== X-Received: by 2002:a05:622a:14ca:b0:3b6:3260:fa1d with SMTP id u10-20020a05622a14ca00b003b63260fa1dmr30134430qtx.45.1676056231795; Fri, 10 Feb 2023 11:10:31 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (95.72.115.87.dyn.plus.net. [87.115.72.95]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id p11-20020a05622a00cb00b003b86d3ee49asm4096377qtw.74.2023.02.10.11.10.31 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Fri, 10 Feb 2023 11:10:31 -0800 (PST) From: Andrew Burgess To: Simon Marchi , gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [PATCHv2] gdb/c++: fix handling of breakpoints on @plt symbols In-Reply-To: References: <756de5175770d79b3f0642fa3035ef348388bda4.1671544509.git.aburgess@redhat.com> <29e560fd9c94874f0839924fa25557a7e8418ad3.1674215225.git.aburgess@redhat.com> Date: Fri, 10 Feb 2023 19:10:30 +0000 Message-ID: <87sffduyjd.fsf@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Type: text/plain X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.7 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_NONE,TXREP autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on server2.sourceware.org List-Id: Simon Marchi writes: >> Lets consider the 3 symbols GDB created. If the function declaration >> is 'void foo ()' then from the main executable we added symbols >> '_Z3foov@plt' and '_Z3foov', while from the shared library we added >> another symbol call '_Z3foov'. When these are demangled they become >> 'foo()@plt', 'foo', and 'foo' respectively. > > I think the last two should be 'foo()'? Fixed in v3. > > I have only looked at the code, not the test. That part LGTM. I was > wondering if you could add some unit tests for strncmp_iw_with_mode for > this case though. There are already some just below the implementation. Thank, I added a couple of tests in v3, which I think cover all the cases I was interested in. Let me know what you think. Thanks, Andrew