forked from Imagelibrary/binutils-gdb
aff250145a
It was observed that changing the number of worker threads that GDB
uses (maintenance set worker-threads NUM) would have an impact on the
layout of the generated gdb-index.
The cause seems to be how the CU are distributed between threads, and
then symbols that appear in multiple CU can be encountered earlier or
later depending on whether a particular CU moves between threads.
I certainly found this behaviour was reproducible when generating an
index for GDB itself, like:
gdb -q -nx -nh -batch \
-eiex 'maint set worker-threads NUM' \
-ex 'save gdb-index /tmp/'
And then setting different values for NUM will change the generated
index.
Now, the question is: does this matter?
I would like to suggest that yes, this does matter. At Red Hat we
generate a gdb-index as part of the build process, and we would
ideally like to have reproducible builds: for the same source,
compiled with the same tool-chain, we should get the exact same output
binary. And we do .... except for the index.
Now we could simply force GDB to only use a single worker thread when
we build the index, but, I don't think the idea of reproducible builds
is that strange, so I think we should ensure that our generated
indexes are always reproducible.
To achieve this, I propose that we add an extra step when building the
gdb-index file. After constructing the initial symbol hash table
contents, we will pull all the symbols out of the hash, sort them,
then re-insert them in sorted order. This will ensure that the
structure of the generated hash will remain consistent (given the same
set of symbols).
I've extended the existing index-file test to check that the generated
index doesn't change if we adjust the number of worker threads used.
Given that this test is already rather slow, I've only made one change
to the worker-thread count. Maybe this test should be changed to use
a smaller binary, which is quicker to load, and for which we could
then try many different worker thread counts.
Approved-By: Tom Tromey <tom@tromey.com>