From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-pj1-x102d.google.com (mail-pj1-x102d.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::102d]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 05B7338654B0 for ; Tue, 25 Jun 2024 22:27:27 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 sourceware.org 05B7338654B0 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=gmail.com ARC-Filter: OpenARC Filter v1.0.0 sourceware.org 05B7338654B0 Authentication-Results: server2.sourceware.org; arc=none smtp.remote-ip=2607:f8b0:4864:20::102d ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=sourceware.org; s=key; t=1719354450; cv=none; b=RmZUmDWc/I0UZ+3AsvQE2FggR28AzXN4R5T0FQ/sCk63VvPz6zyaGUbuyV4EhdiYzTkbMO9PvdKqg6d/WjYvERX08U0/TGAZlRB4MJ3Nx0StbUBysXK7y2hITmjgVocT27k1tj698MHM5h+NEFMbPySrlHUBWImWIWAf0b7DLI8= ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=sourceware.org; s=key; t=1719354450; c=relaxed/simple; bh=bxyTQwb9aRadltSNNGdpjn5vhu0tcZG8QMVdhXfyxgc=; h=DKIM-Signature:MIME-Version:From:Date:Message-ID:Subject:To; b=h82GhY+XN++nqq72NkPeTjBmDNBLgAm55a/TLvSqJAM9Xm60OVnhmBwwDY0JZ8mXwhhHPcuUCYZzf2SikEbuwSqED2PfOGmZWtHf4p/gix8QuItieWVKB/LtJ83FdjHUo4WdMfA2KEXoKD37q3cJDkYInUgawAKtZ+xoLUqfICs= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; server2.sourceware.org Received: by mail-pj1-x102d.google.com with SMTP id 98e67ed59e1d1-2c7fa0c9a8cso4222042a91.1 for ; Tue, 25 Jun 2024 15:27:26 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1719354446; x=1719959246; darn=sourceware.org; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=ewwGKOvA+TAaWmL/9mO3oXicY9UPP1j9e2y6/5ER25U=; b=WXtToHrJU1d/Qc1o2AWy4AK2fH2IhgjPzbF8Cfre4wKtxFsW/0DrGDbs+dSyiXFckC q46Ipuh7E0v18fICUUP94SFokbPqu/XyuPRcCt4pPYz28gjL9P+/lVZZdA9tKFk8h6qN WOyxissuwLWOLWx0+OIcKW513Uqg70gKEX2520EQl2xo7jsvzHgOJJDu8tR9//Xp0PRi hw0M9TVZ5T/lKQGpPFMHnO5oN0kLwiIZHChwekk2P/UmHsPrFD+N/wZ/Uf9cs+esq5QC +DRsw1aRU6EmZUzgemSyEvDQ+L2lyTeXnQXmtxdbRM1lTvRp7BRMMfE/Uqiw3f8oQM6Q lOLw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1719354446; x=1719959246; h=cc: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=ewwGKOvA+TAaWmL/9mO3oXicY9UPP1j9e2y6/5ER25U=; b=i7hRKq9OSlemPXQfhxlWqA05+mZYvTASYna2F1DD1L61TXn//Zs+OOPa1wFZkiFnux LR64R2xeZEkyW8jQJwmxy57WN142OMTXhfDQOZ7+NA4faRgWsPUZnN6qsjQu4RutkmlM HD3Z06sJEer4XU3JOltlgMdJDoMifY8NkxnITItSqLT8CcQyBA+wmERBpDhrKPAWZ3ig Y2ieg5FybAikKNTjIx/dkC4iq3FD1qycP7no5vJ0ahgcF0NTgRlKsFdWrRvHQWDOj8lA //7MQXK5la/JY4RWFSbPcFRgVAnhqyqmhXNdQgnHLJvrNtkys1k0+4T8BYz/4K4wSzmV mSkQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YxP/5r9PgqE8ywGLvb5xaatrkrVVqqcmoGsKNj89fnYH1Zz2/lO tV/g0s/W8zLeBOmkedLzdy+awYQQCgSLche1DVn0A7ttTOmOQxpM6zjqfuWCaNPLTIZiP2FLFFa JRdoHkocRX1fgo10tywsIdHQmzGPOtm/4 X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IGNiMGNuU9pOKoB/TUbCwBKquD8ed3KOveQSLSr6/xLYttFeo522HkHxA7PqRgLovak3k3pQPEYpEaZXG1Jw78= X-Received: by 2002:a17:90b:1e08:b0:2c8:84b:8286 with SMTP id 98e67ed59e1d1-2c8582911a9mr7166505a91.37.1719354445671; Tue, 25 Jun 2024 15:27:25 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: In-Reply-To: From: shaunak saha Date: Tue, 25 Jun 2024 15:27:14 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Contributing to gdb To: Guinevere Larsen Cc: gdb@sourceware.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000fa32aa061bbe6633" X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.0 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT,FREEMAIL_FROM,HTML_MESSAGE,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,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: --000000000000fa32aa061bbe6633 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi Guinevere, Thanks for confirming. I checked the bug 10645 in an x86 system. I don't see the issue anymore: Continuing. [infrun] clear_proceed_status_thread: 17395.17395.0 [infrun] proceed: enter [infrun] follow_fork: enter [infrun] follow_fork: exit [infrun] proceed: cur_thr =3D 17395.17395.0 [infrun] proceed: addr=3D0xffffffffffffffff, signal=3DGDB_SIGNAL_DEFAULT, resume_ptid=3D17395.0.0 [infrun] scoped_disable_commit_resumed: reason=3Dproceeding [infrun] start_step_over: enter [infrun] start_step_over: stealing global queue of threads to step, length =3D 0 [infrun] operator(): step-over queue now empty [infrun] start_step_over: exit [infrun] proceed: start: resuming threads, all-stop-on-top-of-non-stop [infrun] proceed_resume_thread_checked: resuming 17395.17395.0 [infrun] resume_1:* step=3D0*, signal=3DGDB_SIGNAL_0, trap_expected=3D0, current thread [17395.17395.0] at 0x55555555514b [infrun] do_target_resume: resume_ptid=3D17395.17395.0, step=3D0, sig=3DGDB_SIGNAL_0 [infrun] proceed: end: resuming threads, all-stop-on-top-of-non-stop [infrun] reset: reason=3Dproceeding I can see the step is 0. >https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D31911 Thanks for creating the bug. I am looking into it and trying to understand the code. Regards, Shaunak On Wed, Jun 19, 2024 at 5:07=E2=80=AFAM Guinevere Larsen wrote: > On 6/19/24 4:38 AM, shaunak saha wrote: > > Hi, > > > >>> Hello! Welcome welcome, we always love to have new contributors :) > > Thanks a lot for the warm welcome. > > > >>> For watchpoints, the first bug that that page mentions is still open, > >>> but apparently the last mention of anything related to it was in 2014 > >>> (the 2024 comment is unrelated), so you could first check if you can > >>> still reproduce the issue, and maybe try to fix or close the bug if it > >>> can't be reproduced anymore. I'm also a big fan of improving user > >>> experience, so the second thing about watchpoints (and the misuse of > the > >>> word scope) is something I'd love to see, if you're interested in > fixing it. > > Sure, I will check as this will help me to get used to the gdb > > development environment also better. Just to confirm, Is this the bug > > you mentioned? "https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D10645" > Yes, this was the bug I was thinking of. > > > >>> And for internals, if I may do a bit of promotion of my favorite area, > >>> right now reverse debugging has a big problem: We rely on recording t= he > >>> execution history of the inferior in a global variable, which is > totally > >>> not feasible if someone wants to record multiple inferiors at once. I= 'd > >>> love to see a rework of this area that makes the history specific to = an > >>> inferior instead of relying on a global var. This could be pretty > >>> complicated, as I don't exactly know how someone would go about doing > >>> this and it might touch a couple different subsystems, but if you'd > like > >>> your first contribution to be tough as nails, I know I would love to > see > >>> it :) > > Actually this is one of the areas I am very interested in too. This > > would be a really good learning experience for me. For the rework of > > the global variable issues can you please point me to the bug if it's > > there. I can start by learning more about it. > > There wasn't a bug yet, but I just created one > https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D31911 > > I tried to add my thoughts on how this could be done, but this was > thought in the moment, no real research into what's possible or > reasonable. I just so happened to be working close to this area and had > many unstructured thoughts hahaha > > -- > Cheers, > Guinevere Larsen > She/Her/Hers > > > > >>> If you want some help understanding some bits of GDB, feel free to > reach > >>> out on IRC (#gdb on libera chat), and if you feel shy about asking > >>> questions in public, feel free to reach to me privately :) (though I > >>> mostly only answer on work hours for Brazil). > > Thanks a lot. I will reach out on IRC or ask you over email for my > doubts. > > > >>> Just a heads up, too, if your patch isn't a trivial fix, you might ne= ed > >>> to sign a bit of paperwork giving the copyright of changes to GDB to > the > >>> Free Software Foundation before we are able to accept the changes. I > >>> mention this up front because I know a few people who were turned off > by > >>> the idea, even though the process itself isn't complicated. > > I understand. I am ok with signing the paperwork with FSF. I am > > guessing that would not be a problem with my employer but I will still > > check. > > > > Regards, > > Shaunak > > > > On Mon, Jun 17, 2024 at 5:22=E2=80=AFAM Guinevere Larsen > wrote: > >> On 6/14/24 6:52 PM, shaunak saha via Gdb wrote: > >>> Hi all, > >>> > >>> I am new to the community and I'd like to contribute to gdb. I have 15 > >>> years of development experience in C mainly working in embedded > >>> domain. Went through the project ideas page > >>> "https://sourceware.org/gdb/wiki/ProjectIdeas". I would be interested > >>> to contribute in areas like Embedded Debugging, watchpoints or > >>> internals. Any suggestion would be great. > >>> > >>> Regards, > >>> Shaunak > >>> > >> Hello! Welcome welcome, we always love to have new contributors :) > >> > >> My first thought with regards to that page is that I don't know how up > >> to date it is... the last update seems to be back in 2021, which is fr= om > >> before I joined the project. That said, I think there is plenty of > >> things to do in the areas you mentioned. > >> > >> For embedded debugging, unfortunately I have no idea what the situation > is. > >> > >> For watchpoints, the first bug that that page mentions is still open, > >> but apparently the last mention of anything related to it was in 2014 > >> (the 2024 comment is unrelated), so you could first check if you can > >> still reproduce the issue, and maybe try to fix or close the bug if it > >> can't be reproduced anymore. I'm also a big fan of improving user > >> experience, so the second thing about watchpoints (and the misuse of t= he > >> word scope) is something I'd love to see, if you're interested in > fixing it. > >> > >> And for internals, if I may do a bit of promotion of my favorite area, > >> right now reverse debugging has a big problem: We rely on recording the > >> execution history of the inferior in a global variable, which is total= ly > >> not feasible if someone wants to record multiple inferiors at once. I'd > >> love to see a rework of this area that makes the history specific to an > >> inferior instead of relying on a global var. This could be pretty > >> complicated, as I don't exactly know how someone would go about doing > >> this and it might touch a couple different subsystems, but if you'd li= ke > >> your first contribution to be tough as nails, I know I would love to s= ee > >> it :) > >> > >> > >> Once you decided on something to work on, if it isn't something that > >> feels obvious to you or feels like it could depend on some design > >> decisions, I recommend sending a very simple prototype as an RFC to the > >> gdb-patches@sourceware list, so people can discuss if your approach > >> makes sense. > >> > >> If you want some help understanding some bits of GDB, feel free to rea= ch > >> out on IRC (#gdb on libera chat), and if you feel shy about asking > >> questions in public, feel free to reach to me privately :) (though I > >> mostly only answer on work hours for Brazil). > >> > >> > >> Just a heads up, too, if your patch isn't a trivial fix, you might need > >> to sign a bit of paperwork giving the copyright of changes to GDB to t= he > >> Free Software Foundation before we are able to accept the changes. I > >> mention this up front because I know a few people who were turned off = by > >> the idea, even though the process itself isn't complicated. > >> > >> -- > >> Cheers, > >> Guinevere Larsen > >> She/Her/Hers > >> > > --000000000000fa32aa061bbe6633--