Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
In-Reply-To: <227f1a1f-d8dd-72f4-4eb9-43bba714d52a@kernel.org>
References: <20190325184522.260535-1-swboyd@chromium.org> <20190325184522.260535-4-swboyd@chromium.org> <227f1a1f-d8dd-72f4-4eb9-43bba714d52a@kernel.org>
From:   Stephen Boyd <swboyd@chromium.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/4] scripts/gdb: Add rb tree iterating utilities
Cc:     linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@socionext.com>,
        Douglas Anderson <dianders@chromium.org>,
        Nikolay Borisov <n.borisov.lkml@gmail.com>,
        Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@siemens.com>,
        Jackie Liu <liuyun01@kylinos.cn>
To:     Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        Kieran Bingham <kbingham@kernel.org>
Message-ID: <155361993610.20095.762425616683725063@swboyd.mtv.corp.google.com>
User-Agent: alot/0.8
Date:   Tue, 26 Mar 2019 10:05:36 -0700
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

Quoting Kieran Bingham (2019-03-26 01:52:10)
> Hi Stephen,
>=20
> On 25/03/2019 18:45, Stephen Boyd wrote:
> > Implement gdb functions for rb_first(), rb_last(), rb_next(), and
> > rb_prev(). These can be useful to iterate through the kernel's red-black
> > trees.
>=20
> I definitely approve of getting data-structure helpers into scripts/gdb,
> as it will greatly assist debug options but my last attempt to do this
> was with the radix-tree which I had to give up on as the internals were
> changing rapidly and caused continuous breakage to the helpers.

Thanks for the background on radix-tree. I haven't looked at that yet,
but I suppose I'll want to have that too at some point.

>=20
> Do you foresee any similar issue here? Or is the corresponding RB code
> in the kernel fairly 'stable'?
>=20
>=20
> Please could we make sure whomever maintains the RBTree code is aware of
> the python implementation?
>=20
> That said, MAINTAINERS doesn't actually seem to list any ownership over
> the rb-tree code, and get_maintainers.pl [0] seems to be pointing at
> Andrew as the probable route in for that code so perhaps that's already
> in place :D

I don't think that the rb tree implementation is going to change. It
feels similar to the list API. I suppose this problem of keeping things
in sync is a more general problem than just data-structures changing.
The only solution I can offer is to have more testing and usage of these
scripts. Unless gdb can "simulate" or run arbitrary code for us then I
think we're stuck reimplementing kernel internal code in gdb scripts so
that we can get debug info out.