From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 12252 invoked by alias); 12 Aug 2003 17:39:29 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 12226 invoked from network); 12 Aug 2003 17:39:28 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (66.187.233.31) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 12 Aug 2003 17:39:28 -0000 Received: from int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (int-mx1.corp.redhat.com [172.16.52.254]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h7CHdSt17330 for ; Tue, 12 Aug 2003 13:39:28 -0400 Received: from pobox.corp.redhat.com (pobox.corp.redhat.com [172.16.52.156]) by int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h7CHdSs11198; Tue, 12 Aug 2003 13:39:28 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain (vpn50-65.rdu.redhat.com [172.16.50.65]) by pobox.corp.redhat.com (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id h7CHdRWt006261; Tue, 12 Aug 2003 13:39:27 -0400 Received: (from kev@localhost) by localhost.localdomain (8.11.6/8.11.6) id h7CHdL821254; Tue, 12 Aug 2003 10:39:21 -0700 Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2003 17:39:00 -0000 From: Kevin Buettner Message-Id: <1030812173921.ZM21253@localhost.localdomain> In-Reply-To: Mark Kettenis "Re: [RFA/i386]: Enable default support for SSE registers" (Aug 12, 7:06pm) References: <1030722184305.ZM4145@localhost.localdomain> <1030729154932.ZM7867@localhost.localdomain> <863cg6riq5.fsf@elgar.kettenis.dyndns.org> <1030812163937.ZM20976@localhost.localdomain> <200308121706.h7CH6Yl4026190@elgar.kettenis.dyndns.org> To: Mark Kettenis Subject: Re: [RFA/i386]: Enable default support for SSE registers Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-SW-Source: 2003-08/txt/msg00200.txt.bz2 On Aug 12, 7:06pm, Mark Kettenis wrote: > Also... I just noticed the following bit of code in i387-tdep.c: > > i387_supply_register (int regnum, char *fsave) > { > if (fsave == NULL) > { > supply_register (regnum, NULL); > return; > } > > Calling supply_register() with NULL will end up calling memcpy() with > NULL as the second argument. If memcpy() is told to copy a non-zero > number of characters, it'll SEGV. > > Huh, If you call support_register() with NULL, it will use memset() to > initialize the register with all zeroes. My mistake. The "tags" feature in my editor showed me the version in gdbserver/regcache.c. Kevin