From: "Aktemur, Tankut Baris" <tankut.baris.aktemur@intel.com>
To: Simon Marchi <simark@simark.ca>,
"gdb-patches@sourceware.org" <gdb-patches@sourceware.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH v2 1/2] gdb/breakpoint: disable a bp location if condition is invalid at that location
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2020 12:24:58 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <SN6PR11MB2893DC66EC81555C0B005AD0C4040@SN6PR11MB2893.namprd11.prod.outlook.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <SN6PR11MB2893891D70BAE9DA57E037F3C4360@SN6PR11MB2893.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
On Friday, September 25, 2020 8:15 PM, Aktemur, Tankut Baris wrote:
> On Friday, September 25, 2020 6:10 PM, Simon Marchi wrote:
> > On 2020-09-25 11:49 a.m., Aktemur, Tankut Baris via Gdb-patches wrote:
> > > While revising the code, I noticed that when the breakpoint is being defined for
> > > the first time using "break" command, the locations are re-ordered according to
> > > their addresses. So, tracking and reporting the location number as we iterate over
> > > SALs is useless. Instead, we can report the location address.
> > >
> > > Based on this, how about the first option you gave above, but using "validate" instead
> > > of "resolve"? For the "break" command, it reports the address in hex:
> > >
> > > warning: failed to validate condition at location 0x1120, disabling: No symbol "a" in
> > current context.
> >
> > Ok, it would be nicer if we could refer to location numbers at the point
> > where we validate the conditions, it would make a more consistent
> > experience, but that works for now.
>
> We can skip printing the warning but save the exception message inside the loc object.
> Once we are done iterating the locations, we can go over the now-ordered list to print
> the warnings together with the location numbers. How does that sound?
In the next revision (v4), I moved the part that sets the location's condition out of the
loop that iterates the `sals`, and added a second loop over the locations. This way, we
will be iterating a stabilized list of locations where the positional numbers are correct.
So, the next revision does not print hex addresses anymore.
> > > But for the "cond" command, the location number is used because it's stable.
> > >
> > > warning: failed to validate condition at location 2, disabling: No symbol "a" in
> current
> > context.
> > >
> > > Perhaps we can break the message at the comma to avoid this long line.
> >
> > I don't mind... as long as it's clear that it's one message broken on
> > two lines, not two message.
>
> OK, I'll check the GDB doc to see how it looks and will break the line
> if necessary.
It did not look nice in gdb.pdf. I broke the line and indented the error
message. It looks like this in v4:
warning: failed to validate condition at location 2, disabling:
No symbol "a" in current context.
> > >>> Breakpoint 1 at 0x117d: included.c:1. (3 locations)
> > >>> (gdb) break included.c:1 if c == 30
> > >>> Note: breakpoint 1 also set at pc 0x117d.
> > >>> warning: disabling breakpoint location 1: No symbol "c" in current context.
> > >>> Note: breakpoint 1 also set at pc 0x119c.
> > >>> warning: disabling breakpoint location 2: No symbol "c" in current context.
> > >>> Note: breakpoint 1 also set at pc 0x11cf.
> > >>> Breakpoint 2 at 0x117d: included.c:1. (3 locations)
> > >>> (gdb) info break
> > >>> Num Type Disp Enb Address What
> > >>> 1 breakpoint keep y <MULTIPLE>
> > >>> stop only if a == 10
> > >>> 1.1 y 0x000000000000117d in func1 at included.c:1
> > >>> 1.2 n 0x000000000000119c in func2 at included.c:1
> > >>> 1.3 n 0x00000000000011cf in func3 at included.c:1
> > >>> 2 breakpoint keep y <MULTIPLE>
> > >>> stop only if c == 30
> > >>> 2.1 n 0x000000000000117d in func1 at included.c:1
> > >>> 2.2 n 0x000000000000119c in func2 at included.c:1
> > >>> 2.3 y 0x00000000000011cf in func3 at included.c:1
> > >>
> > >> Should we somehow show in the listing that the locations disabled
> > >> because of the condition are disabled and can't be enabled? For
> > >> example, a capital N in the "Enb" column?
> > >
> > > I like the capital N notation. Patch is updated.
> >
> > Ok. Honestly, I find it a bit a bit cryptic, but I don't see a better
> > way without being overly verbose. Perhaps a legend like we have on info
> > shared would help?
> >
> > (*): Shared library is missing debugging information.
>
> I don't have a strong preference. The legend approach would be fine, too.
I went with this legend approach in v4.
> > > Done, with a small change:
> > >
> > > Breakpoint 1's condition is invalid at location 2, cannot enable.
> > >
> > > OK with this?
> >
> > Sounds good!
> >
> > >>>
> > >>> Resetting the condition enables the locations back:
> > >>>
> > >>> ...
> > >>> (gdb) cond 1
> > >>> Breakpoint 1.2 is now enabled.
> > >>> Breakpoint 1.3 is now enabled.
> > >>
> > >> Likewise, this doesn't say why these locations suddenly get enabled.
> > >> Should it? Something like "Breakpoint condition now resolves at
> > >> location 1.2, enabling.". Or is it obvious, because the user is already
> > >> using the "condition" command?
> > >
> > > I think it's useful to say a bit more because the user may have forgotten about
> > > the condition. To be consistent with the message above, how about this:
> > >
> > > Breakpoint 1's condition is now valid at location 2, enabling.
> >
> > Sounds good too.
> >
> > > One additional note: I noticed that the existing "Breakpoint N is now unconditional"
> > > message is guarded by 'from_tty'. I added the same guard to the "...enabling"
> > > messages, too.
> >
> > Do you see any reason for that? Even if these commands are executed in
> > a script, I'd like to be notified about these changes. What do you
> > think?
>
> I had aimed to be consistent with the "... now unconditional" message, but I agree.
> When hidden, such messages sometimes cost valuable time loss. I'll remove the from_tty
> guards I added.
from_tty is removed in v4.
Thanks
-Baris
Intel Deutschland GmbH
Registered Address: Am Campeon 10-12, 85579 Neubiberg, Germany
Tel: +49 89 99 8853-0, www.intel.de
Managing Directors: Christin Eisenschmid, Gary Kershaw
Chairperson of the Supervisory Board: Nicole Lau
Registered Office: Munich
Commercial Register: Amtsgericht Muenchen HRB 186928
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-10-13 12:25 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 103+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-07-31 15:42 [PATCH 0/2] Breakpoint conditions at locations with differing contexts Tankut Baris Aktemur
[not found] ` <cover.1596209606.git.tankut.baris.aktemur@intel.com>
2020-07-31 15:42 ` [PATCH 1/2] gdb/breakpoint: disable a bp location if condition is invalid at that location Tankut Baris Aktemur
2020-07-31 15:42 ` [RFC][PATCH 2/2] gdb/breakpoint: add a '-force' flag to the 'condition' command Tankut Baris Aktemur
2020-08-03 10:28 ` Andrew Burgess
2020-08-20 21:24 ` [PATCH v2 0/2] Breakpoint conditions at locations with differing contexts Tankut Baris Aktemur
2020-08-20 21:24 ` [PATCH v2 1/2] gdb/breakpoint: disable a bp location if condition is invalid at that location Tankut Baris Aktemur
2020-09-19 3:05 ` Simon Marchi
2020-09-25 15:49 ` Aktemur, Tankut Baris
2020-09-25 16:10 ` Simon Marchi
2020-09-25 18:15 ` Aktemur, Tankut Baris
2020-10-13 12:24 ` Aktemur, Tankut Baris [this message]
2020-08-20 21:24 ` [PATCH v2 2/2] gdb/breakpoint: add flags to 'condition' and 'break' commands to force condition Tankut Baris Aktemur
2020-09-04 11:02 ` [PATCH v2 0/2] Breakpoint conditions at locations with differing contexts Tankut Baris Aktemur
2020-09-11 11:56 ` Tankut Baris Aktemur
2020-09-18 20:36 ` [PING][PATCH " Tankut Baris Aktemur
2020-09-25 15:51 ` [PATCH v3 " Tankut Baris Aktemur
2020-09-25 15:51 ` [PATCH v3 1/2] gdb/breakpoint: disable a bp location if condition is invalid at that location Tankut Baris Aktemur
2020-09-25 15:51 ` [PATCH v3 2/2] gdb/breakpoint: add flags to 'condition' and 'break' commands to force condition Tankut Baris Aktemur
2020-10-13 12:25 ` [PATCH v4 0/2] Breakpoint conditions at locations with differing contexts Tankut Baris Aktemur
2020-10-13 12:25 ` [PATCH v4 1/2] gdb/breakpoint: disable a bp location if condition is invalid at that location Tankut Baris Aktemur
2020-10-13 15:06 ` Eli Zaretskii
2020-10-13 15:17 ` Aktemur, Tankut Baris
2020-10-16 22:20 ` Simon Marchi
2020-10-13 12:25 ` [PATCH v4 2/2] gdb/breakpoint: add flags to 'condition' and 'break' commands to force condition Tankut Baris Aktemur
2020-10-13 15:08 ` Eli Zaretskii
2020-10-13 15:46 ` Aktemur, Tankut Baris
2020-10-13 16:12 ` Eli Zaretskii
2020-10-16 22:45 ` Simon Marchi
2020-10-19 13:58 ` Aktemur, Tankut Baris
2020-10-19 14:07 ` Simon Marchi
2020-10-27 10:13 ` Aktemur, Tankut Baris
2020-10-29 10:10 ` Tom de Vries
2020-10-29 10:30 ` Aktemur, Tankut Baris
2020-10-29 17:30 ` Pedro Alves
2020-11-10 19:33 ` Aktemur, Tankut Baris
2020-12-05 17:30 ` Pedro Alves
2020-12-10 20:30 ` Tom Tromey
2020-12-15 11:20 ` Aktemur, Tankut Baris
2020-11-10 19:51 ` Aktemur, Tankut Baris
2020-10-28 16:57 ` [PATCH v4 0/2] Breakpoint conditions at locations with differing contexts Gary Benson
2020-10-29 7:43 ` Aktemur, Tankut Baris
2021-04-05 17:45 ` [PATCH " Jonah Graham
2021-04-06 14:11 ` Aktemur, Tankut Baris
2021-04-06 14:37 ` Jonah Graham
2021-04-07 7:09 ` Aktemur, Tankut Baris
2021-04-07 11:26 ` Jonah Graham
2021-04-07 14:55 ` [PATCH 0/4] Multi-context invalid breakpoint conditions and MI Tankut Baris Aktemur
2021-04-07 14:55 ` [PATCH 1/4] gdb/doc: update the 'enabled' field's description for BP locations in MI Tankut Baris Aktemur
2021-04-07 15:15 ` Eli Zaretskii
2021-04-07 21:42 ` Simon Marchi
2021-04-07 14:55 ` [PATCH 2/4] testsuite, gdb.mi: fix duplicate test names in mi-break.exp Tankut Baris Aktemur
2021-04-07 21:49 ` Simon Marchi
2021-04-07 14:55 ` [PATCH 3/4] gdb/breakpoint: add a 'force_condition' parameter to 'create_breakpoint' Tankut Baris Aktemur
2021-04-07 22:08 ` Simon Marchi
2021-04-08 7:44 ` Aktemur, Tankut Baris
2021-04-08 13:59 ` Simon Marchi
2021-04-08 14:19 ` Aktemur, Tankut Baris
2021-04-07 14:55 ` [PATCH 4/4] gdb/mi: add a '-b' flag to the '-break-insert' cmd to force the condition Tankut Baris Aktemur
2021-04-07 15:18 ` Eli Zaretskii
2021-04-07 15:27 ` Aktemur, Tankut Baris
2021-04-07 15:53 ` Eli Zaretskii
2021-04-07 16:05 ` Aktemur, Tankut Baris
2021-04-07 16:50 ` Eli Zaretskii
2021-04-07 22:26 ` Simon Marchi
2021-04-08 14:22 ` [PATCH v2 0/4] Multi-context invalid breakpoint conditions and MI Tankut Baris Aktemur
2021-04-08 14:22 ` [PATCH v2 1/4] gdb/breakpoint: display "N" on MI for disabled-by-condition locations Tankut Baris Aktemur
2021-04-08 15:04 ` Eli Zaretskii
2021-04-08 14:22 ` [PATCH v2 2/4] testsuite, gdb.mi: fix duplicate test names in mi-break.exp Tankut Baris Aktemur
2021-04-08 14:22 ` [PATCH v2 3/4] gdb/breakpoint: add a 'force_condition' parameter to 'create_breakpoint' Tankut Baris Aktemur
2021-04-08 14:22 ` [PATCH v2 4/4] gdb/mi: add a '--force-condition' flag to the '-break-insert' cmd Tankut Baris Aktemur
2021-04-08 15:06 ` Eli Zaretskii
2021-04-08 15:12 ` Aktemur, Tankut Baris
2021-04-11 1:06 ` Jonah Graham
2021-04-11 1:12 ` Simon Marchi
2021-04-21 12:06 ` Aktemur, Tankut Baris
2021-04-21 12:36 ` Simon Marchi
2021-04-11 1:13 ` [PATCH v2 0/4] Multi-context invalid breakpoint conditions and MI Jonah Graham
2021-04-21 12:17 ` [PATCH v3 " Tankut Baris Aktemur
2021-04-21 12:17 ` [PATCH v3 1/4] gdb/breakpoint: display "N" on MI for disabled-by-condition locations Tankut Baris Aktemur
2021-04-21 12:48 ` Eli Zaretskii
2021-04-21 12:17 ` [PATCH v3 2/4] testsuite, gdb.mi: fix duplicate test names in mi-break.exp Tankut Baris Aktemur
2021-04-21 12:17 ` [PATCH v3 3/4] gdb/breakpoint: add a 'force_condition' parameter to 'create_breakpoint' Tankut Baris Aktemur
2021-04-21 13:18 ` Simon Marchi
2021-04-21 13:29 ` Aktemur, Tankut Baris
2021-04-21 14:28 ` Simon Marchi
2021-04-21 12:17 ` [PATCH v3 4/4] gdb/mi: add a '--force-condition' flag to the '-break-insert' cmd Tankut Baris Aktemur
2021-04-21 12:50 ` Eli Zaretskii
2021-04-21 13:37 ` Simon Marchi
2021-04-21 13:49 ` Aktemur, Tankut Baris
2021-04-21 14:26 ` Simon Marchi
2021-04-22 14:35 ` [PATCH v4 0/2] Multi-context invalid breakpoint conditions and MI Tankut Baris Aktemur
2021-04-22 14:35 ` [PATCH v4 1/2] gdb/mi: add a '--force-condition' flag to the '-break-insert' cmd Tankut Baris Aktemur
2021-05-06 2:40 ` Simon Marchi
2021-04-22 14:35 ` [PATCH v4 2/2] gdb/mi: add a '--force' flag to the '-break-condition' command Tankut Baris Aktemur
2021-04-22 14:47 ` Aktemur, Tankut Baris
2021-05-06 2:46 ` Simon Marchi
2021-05-06 8:50 ` Aktemur, Tankut Baris
2021-07-11 18:51 ` Jonah Graham
2021-07-12 0:25 ` Jonah Graham
2021-07-12 8:33 ` Aktemur, Tankut Baris
2021-05-05 15:57 ` [PATCH v4 0/2] Multi-context invalid breakpoint conditions and MI Aktemur, Tankut Baris
2021-04-07 21:24 ` [PATCH 0/2] Breakpoint conditions at locations with differing contexts Simon Marchi
2021-04-07 21:36 ` Jonah Graham
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=SN6PR11MB2893DC66EC81555C0B005AD0C4040@SN6PR11MB2893.namprd11.prod.outlook.com \
--to=tankut.baris.aktemur@intel.com \
--cc=gdb-patches@sourceware.org \
--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).