This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sourceware.org
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: GDB 7.9 release update
- From: Phil Muldoon <pmuldoon at redhat dot com>
- To: Joel Brobecker <brobecker at adacore dot com>, Pedro Alves <palves at redhat dot com>
- Cc: Doug Evans <dje at google dot com>, gdb-patches <gdb-patches at sourceware dot org>, arnez at vnet dot linux dot ibm dot com
- Date: Wed, 04 Feb 2015 07:01:58 +0000
- Subject: Re: GDB 7.9 release update
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <20150127043704 dot GB4697 at adacore dot com> <CADPb22Q=zLiKYjbAPk=qkh9b3VjmJB7ou8f4tz0shWHnYePR=g at mail dot gmail dot com> <20150129045344 dot GC5193 at adacore dot com> <54D0DA28 dot 9080500 at redhat dot com> <20150204041129 dot GN4525 at adacore dot com>
On 04/02/15 04:11, Joel Brobecker wrote:
>>> I am also wondering if we should also wait for...
>>> https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17837 ... or not.
>>> Pedro, I see you've been kind enough to start looking into this
>>> (bugzilla papertrail). What do you think? Blocker, not blocker?
>>
>> I'm not sure. I haven't fully understood what the scripts in
>> question are doing and how the issue triggers. I've asked Jan
>> if he could come up with a simplified reproducer. Hopefully we'll
>> have a better idea soon.
>
> OK. Thanks a lot for looking into this for us, Pedro.
> I've added this item to the list as a "maybe".
>
>> There was also this:
>>
>> https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2015-01/msg00703.html
>>
>> The issue there is that with both remote and record targets, GDB
>> can get messed up after 'query'. That's a regression compared
>> to 7.8.
>>
>> I think I'll go push that series to master ASAP. I'll wait for
>> feedback on the plan before pushing into 7.9 though.
>
> I've added this as a maybe as well. The patches are a little large,
> but don't necessarily seem scary, and if the failure is bad enough...
> I think you'll have the best perspective to make the call. We will
> wait for feedback if we have to.
>
> We still have a little extra time regardless, as I don't see much
> activity on
>
> https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17716
>
> I'm not too surprised. I think Phil said he was going to be traveling
> too.
>
> Thanks, Pedro!
Sorry for the delay. I've just come back from some meetings and then
FOSDEM. I'll get to work on this bug. But again I do not consider it
a blocker, certainly not for release. There are workarounds for it
(disable frame-filter all), for the cases of exceptionally long
backtraces.
It is unfortunately a non trivial issue having to do with both Python
interrupts and GDB exceptions, so a fix has to be carefully tested.
Cheers
Phil