From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-qv1-xf35.google.com (mail-qv1-xf35.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::f35]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B41633858028 for ; Mon, 12 Apr 2021 18:55:28 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 sourceware.org B41633858028 Received: by mail-qv1-xf35.google.com with SMTP id o11so6808275qvh.11 for ; Mon, 12 Apr 2021 11:55:28 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language :content-transfer-encoding; bh=S4IL8qGyOaNfluOdyueCaba4wgg9ey+F+rcjnmMFEcw=; b=ReM+N6tVJgWkHrcRVNdvTo2djSaVUMoJvpbz3XJKtrt/+Zbs4jLPJwG9Wrnw7hUQCQ MGfjQvrw8b3DjzgkS5b9dKc5d7hdCh6kLPrCRcqofqHkXYYuIWcax60VjaWYfV4j/jmz Enc7ggH7yGrshoz7zqWw/oi6aHV8RSR6/vI0ESwdItjQ7i+EIgWIJAkYM7hSsdt9YH7v rXsPYdUavmr/q1elvTyBZvnq3t/MsIo4YE5IQMxyZmrPegdlE7CKWvht/XM+IfID/h23 lGA0HwMApq1bVcHgah1ZcYutnY4xeM2TBFFUAoeysh+eYZKuxYpqGdhuVnMp3Lak62ou i0oQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531Q9oLbxZOzCxtv9/Bly7tlmaSvIYxXU0wcR3BFdwTwI2V8X7JU MsgP4IJPkd4IcSWkpMyltpeMhUgJECElFg== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyRno7EQvKyZXEqgNBNb9W8iuxPpD23KJ24plHniNwu+tWNk4Ml7FSXHKhCzAk0I5UHmGoYfg== X-Received: by 2002:a0c:80ca:: with SMTP id 68mr29230806qvb.12.1618253728238; Mon, 12 Apr 2021 11:55:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ?IPv6:2804:7f0:4841:2841:bdd4:355d:8be9:6e9f? ([2804:7f0:4841:2841:bdd4:355d:8be9:6e9f]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id a11sm7023479qtd.74.2021.04.12.11.55.26 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 12 Apr 2021 11:55:27 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: Expected output of gdb.cp/no-dmgl-verbose.exp To: Keith Seitz , "gdb@sourceware.org" References: <3de907e5-c711-ab80-8b27-f7c13fbde7ec@linaro.org> <39eb19e5-d1fd-4997-60e0-e9835fd1d090@redhat.com> From: Luis Machado Message-ID: <5cdfc7cf-5c94-c8b9-8cd2-2747085a7b42@linaro.org> Date: Mon, 12 Apr 2021 15:55:25 -0300 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.7.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <39eb19e5-d1fd-4997-60e0-e9835fd1d090@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.2 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, DKIM_VALID_EF, NICE_REPLY_A, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE, SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS, TXREP autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on server2.sourceware.org X-BeenThere: gdb@sourceware.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Gdb mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 12 Apr 2021 18:55:30 -0000 On 4/12/21 3:45 PM, Keith Seitz wrote: > On 4/12/21 11:16 AM, Luis Machado via Gdb wrote: >> I'm trying to determine why this particular test is failing (for both >> aarch64-linux and x86_64-linux on Ubuntu 18.04/20.04) and what the >> expected outcome is. >> >> In my case, the only symbol I see for function "f" is the following: >> >> "f(std::__cxx11::basic_string, >> std::allocator >)" >> >> There is no "f(std::string)" nor "f(std::basic_string> std::char_traits, std::allocator >)" symbol. >> > > Wow, such a long time ago! IIRC... Indeed. I vaguely remember that, back in ~2011 IIRC. But obviously not enough to figure out what was going on. > > This test was written to ensure that "std::string" was used > instead of "std::basic_string<...>" (which is now called something > else again). Something about "that's what nm and other tools tell users, > so we should not mention the symbol's real (linkage) name, either." > > The "no-dmgl-verbose" refers to the DMGL_VERBOSE option > of the demangler, which does this. > > There is even special logic in our typedef-replacing machinery to > enforce this. [NOTE: `ignore_typedefs' in cp-support.c is also "out- > of-date" wrt to this naming change. So none of that has likely been > "working" for many years, but then at very quick glance, "nm -C" doesn't > do this anymore, either.] Ah, that makes it much more clear. Thanks for the explanation. > > I was against it then, so I certainly do not mind getting rid of this test > or limiting it to C++ installations that typedef the "older" std::basic_string<...> > to std::string. I think keeping it may be more confusing than useful. I'll propose its removal on gdb-patches@ and we'll see where we go from there. Thanks Keith. > > Keith >