This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sourceware.org
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: RFA: [Ada] extract known tasks array parameters from symbol table
On Feb 13, 2012, at 5:15 PM, Joel Brobecker wrote:
> Hi Tristan,
>
>> Maybe we should get rid of the fallback, as without debug symbol for
>> Ada.Tasking, the whole ada-tasks.c code is pretty useless.
>
> The problem is that certain GNU/Linux distributions decided to simply
> strip all runtime libraries of debug info, and then provide additional
> packages for the debug version of these shared libs. And apparently,
> it's a significant disruption to address this issue at the package
> creation level. So we need to try to support those users the best
> we can.
Ok. But how are debug infos for the ATCB read ? Are they in the executable due to implicit with of ada.tasking ?
>> Manually tested on ia64-hp-openvms.
>
> I'd really like it to be tested on at least a GNU/Linux variant as
> well as a bareboard variant using the ravenscar runtime (try the list).
> Or, alternatively, put the patch in our tree, and then wait a day or
> two to get the results of the nightly testing.
Ok, will do.
>> gdb/
>> 2012-02-13 Tristan Gingold <gingold@adacore.com>
>>
>> * ada-tasks.c (struct ada_tasks_inferior_data): Add
>> known_tasks_element and known_tasks_length fields.
>> (read_known_tasks_array): Change argument type. Use pointer type
>> and number of elements from DATA. Adjust.
>> (read_known_tasks_list): Likewise.
>> (get_known_tasks_addr): Change profile. Try symtab first, and
>> extract type and size from it.
>> (ada_set_current_inferior_known_tasks_addr): Adjust for above
>> change.
>
> Mostly OK.
>
> Just a few thoughts on your patch.
>
>> -/* Return the address of the variable NAME that contains all the known
>> - tasks maintained in the Ada Runtime. Return NULL if the variable
>> - could not be found, meaning that the inferior program probably does
>> - not use tasking. */
>> +/* Try method KIND to extract known tasks info for DATA.
>> + Return non-zero in case of success, and set the known tasks field of DATA.
>> +*/
>
> Nit-picking: Can you fold the last line at around 70 chars?
Sure.
>
>> -static CORE_ADDR
>> -get_known_tasks_addr (const char *name)
>> +static int
>> +get_known_tasks_addr (struct ada_tasks_inferior_data *data,
>> + enum ada_known_tasks_kind kind)
>
> For this function, I would like it to be renamed to "get_ada_tasks_info",
> "get_inferior_tasks_info", or maybe even "ada_task_info_sniffer".
> Something like that.
>
> Also, I am thinking that there is no reason that the caller should
> be testing each kind one after the other. I think something like:
>
> static struct ada_tasks_inferior_data *
> ada_task_info_sniffer (void)
> {
> [lookup array symbol]
> if (symbol)
> {
> [validate]
> return array_info;
> }
>
> [lookup list symbol]
> if (symbol)
> {
> [validate]
> return list_info;
> }
> [...]
>
> WDYT?
Will submit a new version.
Tristan.