From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48) id 99EA9385C6ED; Wed, 23 Aug 2023 20:02:18 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 99EA9385C6ED DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sourceware.org; s=default; t=1692820938; bh=toLalickofmgLmjk28+6cZVLMHmomThIZ+RIBREDlhs=; h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=uFLdWItgQLLJaSplIMmd5eC4VDzSc5Tmku45uU4ix+papokg2NpUX13NuP5Bv60H7 98J4N5eiXgllgQS96LAh/dJvBwxinp5Rxllzvxmqq2j9GW6s4bab2BLL0pyPpR2M0o YMyyLzfGi33oo8N7wTOih/j+OopY710v0vE103No= From: "tromey at sourceware dot org" To: gdb-prs@sourceware.org Subject: [Bug symtab/29942] Read some DWARF purely in background Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2023 20:02:17 +0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: gdb X-Bugzilla-Component: symtab X-Bugzilla-Version: HEAD X-Bugzilla-Keywords: X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal X-Bugzilla-Who: tromey at sourceware dot org X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW X-Bugzilla-Resolution: X-Bugzilla-Priority: P2 X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at sourceware dot org X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: --- X-Bugzilla-Flags: X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Bugzilla-URL: http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated MIME-Version: 1.0 List-Id: https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D29942 --- Comment #6 from Tom Tromey --- (In reply to Tom Tromey from comment #5) > I also looked at wrapping the cache iovec in a locked variant. > However, this code in bfd_cache_close prevents that approach: >=20 > /* Don't remove this test. bfd_reinit depends on it. */ > if (abfd->iovec !=3D &cache_iovec) > return true; >=20 > I think I'll just end up wrapping all "suspect" BFD calls in > a global lock. This may not be too bad, especially if we switch > back to eager mapping of DWARF sections. There are 135 separate bfd_* functions called by gdb. So, auditing this is a pain and probably error-prone. And then some subset have to be wrapped in a lock, including any that set the BFD error. Coming back around to maybe trying to make the BFD error be thread-local. --=20 You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.=