This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sourceware.org
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: [python][patch] Inferior and Thread information support.
- From: Tom Tromey <tromey at redhat dot com>
- To: Phil Muldoon <pmuldoon at redhat dot com>
- Cc: gdb-patches ml <gdb-patches at sourceware dot org>
- Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2010 12:40:41 -0600
- Subject: Re: [python][patch] Inferior and Thread information support.
- References: <4BFA6E82.3070704@redhat.com>
- Reply-to: tromey at redhat dot com
>>>>> "Phil" == Phil Muldoon <pmuldoon@redhat.com> writes:
Phil> This patch adds Python support to inferiors and threads.
Sorry for the delay in this review.
Phil> /* Copied from bfd_put_bits. */
Phil> -static void
Phil> +void
Phil> put_bits (bfd_uint64_t data, char *buf, int bits, bfd_boolean big_p)
I don't think you need this change. Use store_unsigned_integer instead.
I don't understand why this function exists at all.
Phil> +void
Phil> +allocate_pattern_buffer (char **pattern_buf, char **pattern_buf_end,
Phil> + ULONGEST *pattern_buf_size)
Phil> +void
Phil> +increase_pattern_buffer (char **pattern_buf, char **pattern_buf_end,
Phil> + ULONGEST *pattern_buf_size, int val_bytes)
I think this stuff can be easily done with obstacks. I prefer we not
add more growable types in situations where we can reuse the ones we
already have.
Phil> + /* While creating new inferior no inferior thread is available.
Phil> + Therefore get_current_arch has no valid current frame (and it
Phil> + would crash). */
Phil> + cleanup = ensure_python_env (target_gdbarch, current_language);
You should use python_gdbarch and python_language here.
This occurs a couple of times.
Phil> +/* An observer callback function that is called when an inferior has
Phil> + been deleted. Removes the corresponding Python object from the
Phil> + inferior list, and removes the list's reference to the object. */
Phil> +static void
Phil> +delete_inferior_object (struct inferior *inf)
Phil> +{
Phil> + struct cleanup *cleanup;
Phil> + struct inflist_entry **inf_entry, *inf_tmp;
Phil> + struct threadlist_entry *th_entry, *th_tmp;
Phil> +
Phil> + /* Find inferior_object for the given PID. */
Phil> + for (inf_entry = &gdbpy_inferior_list; *inf_entry != NULL;
Phil> + inf_entry = &(*inf_entry)->next)
Phil> + if ((*inf_entry)->inf_obj->inferior->pid == inf->pid)
Phil> + break;
It seems strange to compare the pid fields when we could just compare
the inferior objects themselves.
Phil> +/* Implementation of Inferior.frames () -> (gdb.Frame, ...).
Phil> + Returns a tuple of all frame objects. */
Phil> +PyObject *
Phil> +thpy_frames (PyObject *self, PyObject *args)
[...]
Phil> + for (frame = get_current_frame (); frame;
Phil> + frame = get_prev_frame (frame))
Phil> + {
Phil> + frame_obj = frame_info_to_frame_object (frame);
Phil> + if (frame_obj == NULL)
Phil> + {
I don't think this is wise. It is not uncommon for a crash to cause a
thread to have thousands of frames.
Hm, maybe there is no way to return a frame-in-a-thread and then be able
to iterate. IOW, a gdb internals limitation. That is unfortunate (if
true) but I don't think it is a reason for us to go with this API.
One short-term solution would be to get rid of this method.
Phil> +/* Implementation of InferiorThread.newest_frame () -> gdb.Frame.
Phil> + Returns the newest frame object. */
Phil> +PyObject *
Phil> +thpy_newest_frame (PyObject *self, PyObject *args)
Phil> +{
Phil> + struct frame_info *frame;
Phil> + PyObject *frame_obj = NULL; /* Initialize to appease gcc warning. */
Phil> + thread_object *thread_obj = (thread_object *) self;
Phil> + struct cleanup *cleanup;
Phil> + volatile struct gdb_exception except;
Phil> +
Phil> + THPY_REQUIRE_VALID (thread_obj);
Phil> +
Phil> + cleanup = make_cleanup_restore_current_thread ();
Phil> +
Phil> + TRY_CATCH (except, RETURN_MASK_ALL)
Phil> + {
Phil> + switch_to_thread (thread_obj->thread->ptid);
Phil> +
Phil> + frame = get_current_frame ();
Phil> + frame_obj = frame_info_to_frame_object (frame);
Phil> + }
Phil> + GDB_PY_HANDLE_EXCEPTION (except);
I am really not sure about this.
Doesn't switch_to_thread reset the frame cache?
Meaning that the returned frame_obj will immediately be invalid?
You would have to try this with a multi-threaded program, where you are
stopped in thread A but then request a frame in thread B.
Phil> +void
Phil> +gdbpy_initialize_thread (void)
Phil> +{
Phil> +
Phil> + if (PyType_Ready (&thread_object_type) < 0)
Spurious blank line.
Tom