diff options
| author | Tankut Baris Aktemur <tankut.baris.aktemur@intel.com> | 2025-01-14 10:10:30 +0100 |
|---|---|---|
| committer | Tankut Baris Aktemur <tankut.baris.aktemur@intel.com> | 2025-01-14 10:27:57 +0100 |
| commit | a4451f7c81aeed2679cb9586c529bfb1980c9ab7 (patch) | |
| tree | 3bc4e1079bfe2645b01d650d64cca3f31a8665bb /gdb/NEWS | |
| parent | b2ad166b89399e2720ae4a4321cf2934f990477b (diff) | |
| download | fsf-binutils-gdb-a4451f7c81aeed2679cb9586c529bfb1980c9ab7.zip fsf-binutils-gdb-a4451f7c81aeed2679cb9586c529bfb1980c9ab7.tar.gz fsf-binutils-gdb-a4451f7c81aeed2679cb9586c529bfb1980c9ab7.tar.bz2 | |
gdbserver: remove UST (static tracepoint) support (part 1)
UST support in gdbserver is substantially outdated. Simon says:
...[having HAVE_UST defined] never happens nowadays because it used
a version of lttng-ust that has been deprecated for a loooong time
(the 0.x series). So everything in HAVE_UST just bitrots. It might
be possible to update all this code to use lttng-ust 2.x (1.x never
existed), but I don't think it's going to happen unless somebody
specifically asks for it. I would suggest removing support for UST
from gdbserver. ...If we ever want to resurrect the support for UST
and port to 2.x, we can get the code from the git history.
This patch removes the support, mostly mechanically by deleting code
guarded by `#ifdef HAVE_UST`. After these removals, `struct
static_tracepoint_ctx` becomes unused. So, remove it, too.
The following patches remove more code.
Reviewed-By: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>
Approved-By: Simon Marchi <simon.marchi@efficios.com>
Diffstat (limited to 'gdb/NEWS')
| -rw-r--r-- | gdb/NEWS | 2 |
1 files changed, 2 insertions, 0 deletions
@@ -22,6 +22,8 @@ >end >end +* UST (static tracepoint) support from gdbserver has been removed. + * New commands maintenance check psymtabs |