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 7937E3858D1E for ; Mon, 19 Dec 2022 12:29:09 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 sourceware.org 7937E3858D1E 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=1671452949; 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=mvCEgN2JsVKkNviFVKC9T+xIBAzpXyPVnYF9Erlk+1c=; b=jCkpxPdiE80/9Hzwlp57z/QetiTk5VUlFCFE22qy3j7ouOfyivzwmnl0PvI0k3IZYfZR5u GyuoR+kf7OuWB+iW6o1uHyYAGkONVsqLZIk3bdsqSH0rl7zjsV4S+x3wgYAA192cA4vcMd 6z96puHjtX55uFpNtdasQuFDnYz5yz0= Received: from mail-pg1-f200.google.com (mail-pg1-f200.google.com [209.85.215.200]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.3, cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256) id us-mta-354-jkI2CIznOAS1KE1R99HJSw-1; Mon, 19 Dec 2022 07:29:07 -0500 X-MC-Unique: jkI2CIznOAS1KE1R99HJSw-1 Received: by mail-pg1-f200.google.com with SMTP id s16-20020a632c10000000b0047084b16f23so5395684pgs.7 for ; Mon, 19 Dec 2022 04:29:07 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references:mime-version :x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=mvCEgN2JsVKkNviFVKC9T+xIBAzpXyPVnYF9Erlk+1c=; b=SW7t4wfgcqY+5+/HLhHJekUWjh95eJmhxQ04++dzfx3H+wJCcQfBXtyRkutl2qCcs/ +15ENaclAAg/tN4+suynC86X4jozuxnAqDi5evQbxFENJNlDAs/Sjn9p7SD+yMxqM3We qSpGEGEJPPvFVY6KlAx6JYdczKSppkzEuq7D3aJYMYqifdnsRhLkwI/NapuAim7BrjJg ERf6juAciA1k5U11yn/hdmEGKmItPnOdBEd30L+RGk5yvm0PRBXUpUsy2P6uRL0OItQ5 5VIeeBlBzZL+q550zj0P6Ob8V1EROMhNXJ6XjP9B3v6FFapmg3SgrOm7/cD5Dh5xWjnV 79DA== X-Gm-Message-State: ANoB5pmNq+cS2heauQRGSvcBAlPuffPyn2zW09Xc6ImZTa74jxoJc+El OQPwqUFRVaNK5ieidbNHdNVNLQCxQR3rxUZhuD7HTEr3s3hFUF0K/UzDHRN+l6o2kIklkM43urU yWaHLy+5QOlHWNXeQgOtZ6fgQDUZQe384+wzxpA== X-Received: by 2002:a65:5c4b:0:b0:477:2aac:56bb with SMTP id v11-20020a655c4b000000b004772aac56bbmr85657844pgr.570.1671452946389; Mon, 19 Dec 2022 04:29:06 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Smtp-Source: AA0mqf6cDTKHX1ZbsERM5sUIOviFZn6xaLz33MPngZeEsCiTdsBwTc9SHcNrQjM+tcnSJt+F2m8owrAQi28R9m4kHxI= X-Received: by 2002:a65:5c4b:0:b0:477:2aac:56bb with SMTP id v11-20020a655c4b000000b004772aac56bbmr85657843pgr.570.1671452946106; Mon, 19 Dec 2022 04:29:06 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20221212121535.4013497-1-ahajkova@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: From: Alexandra Petlanova Hajkova Date: Mon, 19 Dec 2022 13:28:54 +0100 Message-ID: Subject: Fwd: [PATCH] gdb: defer warnings when loading separate debug files To: gdb-patches@sourceware.org X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000001caa8805f02d7730" X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.5 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,HTML_MESSAGE,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: --0000000000001caa8805f02d7730 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" > > I don't really like this behavior change. The situations you described: > > - a separate debug file without any actual debug information > - CRC checksum that doesn't match > > ... are abnormal situations which still deserve being warned about, I > think. If the files are there, it's because they are meant to be used, > so if something prevents GDB from using them, I want to know. Silencing > the warning just makes investigating "why doesn't GDB read my separate > debug file" harder. > > I can understand why this can be a bit confusing to the user, but > the warning is still factually correct. For instance, the one you > quoted: > > warning: the debug information found in > "/usr/lib/debug//lib64/ld-2.32.so.debug" > does not match "/lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2" (CRC mismatch). > > This doesn't say that GDB didn't end up finding *some* debug info for > the shared object, just that this particular one is broken. Maybe it's > an old one I installed by hand, that I should delete, maybe the package > from the distro is broken. In any case it's good for the user to know > so they can fix the situation. > > Simon > > Yes, it's a good point. It might be confusing to see the warnings if the correct debuginfo was retrieved but it might be useful to see all the warnings on the other hand. I would love to have more opinions on this matter. Thank you, Alexandra --0000000000001caa8805f02d7730--