This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: [PATCH] Remove support for "rtld_" prefix on solib-svr4 probes
- From: Pedro Alves <palves at redhat dot com>
- To: Sergio Durigan Junior <sergiodj at redhat dot com>
- Cc: GDB Patches <gdb-patches at sourceware dot org>, Gary Benson <gbenson at redhat dot com>
- Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2014 22:13:29 +0100
- Subject: Re: [PATCH] Remove support for "rtld_" prefix on solib-svr4 probes
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <1411581801-19126-1-git-send-email-sergiodj at redhat dot com> <5423F08B dot 1040409 at redhat dot com> <87bnq3h1gf dot fsf_-_ at redhat dot com>
On 09/25/2014 09:47 PM, Sergio Durigan Junior wrote:
> Thanks for the review.
> On Thursday, September 25 2014, Pedro Alves wrote:
>> Well, AFAICS, upstream GDB still supports F17's probes. See
>> memset (probes, 0, sizeof (probes));
>> for (i = 0; i < NUM_PROBES; i++)
>> const char *name = probe_info[i].name;
>> struct probe *p;
>> char buf;
>> /* Fedora 17 and Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6.2-6.4
>> shipped with an early version of the probes code in
>> which the probes' names were prefixed with "rtld_"
>> and the "map_failed" probe did not exist. The
>> locations of the probes are otherwise the same, so
>> we check for probes with prefixed names if probes
>> with unprefixed names are not present. */
>> if (with_prefix)
>> xsnprintf (buf, sizeof (buf), "rtld_%s", name);
>> name = buf;
> Indeed it does, thanks for catching this.
>> So it seems to me the test should cope with both variants.
> Or maybe we should simplify this code and remove this support.
> Really, Fedora 17 was EOL'ed more than 1 year ago:
> And we are already on Fedora 20, moving towards Fedora 21. Also, this
> code was needed because a patch present in Fedora 17's glibc, so I think
> it is fair to leave this to be handled by Fedora GDB if needed (but it
> won't be, because the upstream glibc patches already made into Fedora
There's RHEL (at least, per the comment) 6.4 too, which isn't EOL'ed,
though. It's reasonable to expect that people may still want to
build/test upstream gdb on those?