This is the mail archive of the gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com mailing list for the GDB project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: [PATCH] Further extend "maint info sections" cmd with ALLOBJ


At 11:53 21/12/2001 , Pierre Muller a écrit:
>At 23:30 20/12/2001 , Michael Snyder a écrit:
>
> >As a further extension, the "maint info sections" command
> >will now accept an argument "ALLOBJ" to iterate over all
> >known object files (which includes shared libraries.
> >You can now do (for instance):
> >
> >         (gdb) maint info sect .bss ALLOBJ
> >
> >to see info on the .bss sections of all loaded object files.
>
>Great job!
>
>   Just a little remark, I would have expected that I get the same output
>for the main executable in
>
>"maint info sect"
>and
>"maint info sect ALLOBJ"
>but when I tried it out on a freshly compiled GDB,
>the seciond command didn't should
>the .stab and .stabstr sections that were shown for the first command.
>
>This is intentional?

The problem might be quite general :

maint info sect NEVER_LOAD 
gives the same output than 
maint info sect HAS_CONTENT

Debugging a little more lead me to find out that
the reason of that bug is simply that
NEVER_LOAD contains LOAD,
ans strstr function returns thus true for strstr(string, "LOAD")
if string is "NEVER_LOAD"

I don't know the best way to solve this
especially as someone could ask for both 
LOAD and NEVER_LOAD flags at the same time.
(maybe adding a space a start of args and looking for ' LOAD' with a leading space).
Anyhow the current  code also accepts thingss like NOCODE for CODE section
which is quite strange...)

To come back to the problem about .stab section,
the problem is related to the fact that
   ALL_OBJFILE_OSECTIONS 
is defined as
#define ALL_OBJFILE_OSECTIONS(objfile, osect)   \
   for (osect = objfile->sections; osect < objfile->sections_end; osect++)

whereas the case without ALLOBJ is handled by a call to 
bfd_map_over_sections () function which does iterate in a different way:
   for (sect = abfd->sections; sect != NULL; i++, sect = sect->next)

Wouldn't it be better to use the same bfd_map_over_sections () 
function in the ALLOBJ case?




Pierre Muller
Institut Charles Sadron
6,rue Boussingault
F 67083 STRASBOURG CEDEX (France)
mailto:muller@ics.u-strasbg.fr
Phone : (33)-3-88-41-40-07  Fax : (33)-3-88-41-40-99


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]