This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: [RFA] Introduce notion of "search name"
- From: Daniel Jacobowitz <drow at false dot org>
- To: Jim Blandy <jimb at redhat dot com>
- Cc: Paul Hilfinger <hilfingr at gnat dot com>, gdb-patches at sources dot redhat dot com
- Date: Thu, 1 Apr 2004 10:00:22 -0500
- Subject: Re: [RFA] Introduce notion of "search name"
- References: <20040303191550.7307DF2DB8@nile.gnat.com> <20040305035955.GH5320@nevyn.them.org> <20040305103925.A4815F2EE4@nile.gnat.com> <20040331221249.GA6811@nevyn.them.org> <vt2brmbeon5.fsf@zenia.home>
On Thu, Apr 01, 2004 at 09:52:46AM -0500, Jim Blandy wrote:
>
> Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@false.org> writes:
> > On Fri, Mar 05, 2004 at 05:39:25AM -0500, Paul Hilfinger wrote:
> > > Daniel,
> > >
> > > > It doesn't address on of the thornier problems I hit when doing the
> > > > same thing, namely that of allocation. OK, someone uses
> > > > SYMBOL_DEMANGLED_NAME, we lazily allocate a demangled name - where? The
> > > > objfile is not available. I think there may be no option but to
> > > > pass the objfile to SYMBOL_DEMANGLED_NAME. What did you do for Ada?
> > >
> > > You're right, I did not address this in the patch proper. I had
> > > prepared a patch in which I used that extra byte in struct symtab to
> > > tag the union and allow an objfile member. However, I was aware from
> > > correspondence with you that you were working in this area, and that
> > > some of what you proposed to do might eventually allow us to re-do Ada
> > > symbol lookup. So I decided not to modify the symtab struct for the
> > > moment, and instead submit a patch that would change as little as
> > > possible. I figured it would be better not to do anything just now
> > > that might interfere with on-going work on the symbol table.
> > >
> > > So as an interim measure, I use your suggestion of 21 Jan and first
> > > try to find an objfile via the BFD section. When that doesn't work, I
> > > simply use a global hashtable to hold the demangled strings. Yes,
> > > that is a memory leak, but on consideration, I realized that it's only
> > > REALLY a memory leak if (a) I routinely change the entire set of
> > > demangled names numerous times during a single GDB session, or (b)
> > > demangle entirely different, large sets of names each time I reload
> > > the symbol tables. Yeah, I know, it's not pretty, but again I am hoping
> > > it will ensure that demangled names behave until the next interation of
> > > symtab modifications allow an entirely different strategy.
> >
> > I'm not sure what others will think of this interim measure. I don't
> > like it much, though.
>
> Under what circumstances does finding an objfile by the minsym's BFD
> section not work? That minsym must have come from somewhere. Do we
> produce minsyms whose sections are unset, for some reason?
Well, (A) it's inefficient, since there's no pointer from the BFD
section to the GDB section; (B) I don't know whether we produce minsyms
whose sections are unset; (C) I really want to remove the section
pointer from general_symbol_info someday, and this will make that
harder. I've abandoned that project for the moment while I catch up on
other projects, but I'll be back to it :)
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
MontaVista Software Debian GNU/Linux Developer