Re: [RFA] Introduce solib_loaded observer

[Daniel Jacobowitz <drow at false dot org>]

On Sun, Jan 09, 2005 at 02:05:15PM +0100, Mark Kettenis wrote:
>    > The patch below doesn't only implement the new observer.  The reason
>    > for that is that when the solib_loaded observer is called, the symbols
>    > for the new library haven't been loaded yet.  So I've split out the
>    > code to read in those symbols out from solib_add() into a seperate
>    > function, and made that public.
> 
>    Could you explain why this is necessary, instead of calling the
>    observer after loading symbols?  I don't see notification at that point
>    as particularly useful.  Certainly the first thing the GNU/Linux code
>    would want to do would be to load the symbols.
> 
> Calling the observer after loading the symbols isn't possible.  You
> can set "auto-solib-add" to 0, and then the symbols will never be
> loaded at all.  So you'll always have to force loading the symbols
> from within your observer anyway (but you only have to do so for the
> threads library).  From a code perspective the point where the
> notification is called is the most logical.  And that way it's less
> likely that we see "auto-solib-add" related bugs ;-).

At the same time, I worry that it's going to be confusingly
inconsistent - for instance, I would have expected turning off
auto-solib-add to prevent loading symbols for libpthread!  Or at least,
loading of full symbols (all libthread_db on GNU/Linux really needs are
a couple of minsyms).

I don't think "isn't possible" is accurate; there are only two callers
of update_solib_list, and one of them wants to read the symbols.  That
could be pushed down into an argument to update_solib_list.  Would that
be better?

-- 
Daniel Jacobowitz