From: Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@mvista.com>
To: Jim Blandy <jimb@zwingli.cygnus.com>
Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
Subject: Re: [RFA/c++] Fix printing classes with virtual base classes
Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2001 21:36:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20011127003659.A3965@nevyn.them.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <np667wket5.fsf@zwingli.cygnus.com>
On Mon, Nov 26, 2001 at 11:39:34PM -0500, Jim Blandy wrote:
>
> I'm with you on VALUE_OFFSET and VALUE_EMBEDDED_OFFSET. I'm pretty
> sure VALUE_OFFSET can be eliminated from GDB entirely, with some minor
> changes to the representation of subvalues of registers and
> convenience variables.
I am exceedingly tempted to do this.
> Can you explain exactly what TYPE_VPTR_FIELDNO means, and how it works
> in heavily derived classes? What I think you're basically doing there
> is taking the address of the field indicated by TYPE_VPTR_FIELDNO,
> casting that to a void *, and then casting that to the `struct
> gdb_gnu_v3_abi_vtable' type. I have this vague memory that maybe
> using TYPE_VPTR_FIELDNO correctly would fix that.
I certainly can't explain it :) This code mostly mystifies me. It
seems that the vptr for a given class is always a field of the class,
and may actually overlap where the vptr for its first virtual base
class. TYPE_VPTR_FIELDNO tells us where it is. For example, in GCC
2.x, this code:
class Foo
{
int bar;
public:
virtual int thug() { return 1; }
};
class Foo2
{
int bar2;
};
class Baz : public Foo2, public Foo {
int baz;
public:
virtual int thugs() { return 1; }
};
will cause vptr_fieldno for Baz to be 1, indicating its vptr is stored
in memory at the beginning of field 1.
Gnu v2 code handles this by casting the Baz to a Foo, at which point
magic happens, and somehow the vptr is visible. This suggests that my
fix is not the best way of doing it, and I should be using
TYPE_VPTR_BASETYPE somehow instead. I may need to think some more.
Upon further reflection, TYPE_VPTR_FIELDNO is supposed to be a field
index in TYPE_VPTR_BASETYPE. Interesting. I think there's something
wrong here; more comments tomorrow.
> I wonder if that dereferencing code could be simplified with a
> judicious use of `lookup_pointer_type (vtable_type)' and
> `value_deref'...
I suppose it would read simpler if I took a value_addr () and cast a
bit. But magic happens in value casting that I don't want to happen.
--
Daniel Jacobowitz Carnegie Mellon University
MontaVista Software Debian GNU/Linux Developer
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID
From: Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@mvista.com>
To: Jim Blandy <jimb@zwingli.cygnus.com>
Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
Subject: Re: [RFA/c++] Fix printing classes with virtual base classes
Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2001 00:12:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20011127003659.A3965@nevyn.them.org> (raw)
Message-ID: <20011114001200.-1UPC1s5sp0-aF1X76oH9TOy2WmAkabKicPrNcNqw-Y@z> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <np667wket5.fsf@zwingli.cygnus.com>
On Mon, Nov 26, 2001 at 11:39:34PM -0500, Jim Blandy wrote:
>
> I'm with you on VALUE_OFFSET and VALUE_EMBEDDED_OFFSET. I'm pretty
> sure VALUE_OFFSET can be eliminated from GDB entirely, with some minor
> changes to the representation of subvalues of registers and
> convenience variables.
I am exceedingly tempted to do this.
> Can you explain exactly what TYPE_VPTR_FIELDNO means, and how it works
> in heavily derived classes? What I think you're basically doing there
> is taking the address of the field indicated by TYPE_VPTR_FIELDNO,
> casting that to a void *, and then casting that to the `struct
> gdb_gnu_v3_abi_vtable' type. I have this vague memory that maybe
> using TYPE_VPTR_FIELDNO correctly would fix that.
I certainly can't explain it :) This code mostly mystifies me. It
seems that the vptr for a given class is always a field of the class,
and may actually overlap where the vptr for its first virtual base
class. TYPE_VPTR_FIELDNO tells us where it is. For example, in GCC
2.x, this code:
class Foo
{
int bar;
public:
virtual int thug() { return 1; }
};
class Foo2
{
int bar2;
};
class Baz : public Foo2, public Foo {
int baz;
public:
virtual int thugs() { return 1; }
};
will cause vptr_fieldno for Baz to be 1, indicating its vptr is stored
in memory at the beginning of field 1.
Gnu v2 code handles this by casting the Baz to a Foo, at which point
magic happens, and somehow the vptr is visible. This suggests that my
fix is not the best way of doing it, and I should be using
TYPE_VPTR_BASETYPE somehow instead. I may need to think some more.
Upon further reflection, TYPE_VPTR_FIELDNO is supposed to be a field
index in TYPE_VPTR_BASETYPE. Interesting. I think there's something
wrong here; more comments tomorrow.
> I wonder if that dereferencing code could be simplified with a
> judicious use of `lookup_pointer_type (vtable_type)' and
> `value_deref'...
I suppose it would read simpler if I took a value_addr () and cast a
bit. But magic happens in value casting that I don't want to happen.
--
Daniel Jacobowitz Carnegie Mellon University
MontaVista Software Debian GNU/Linux Developer
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2001-11-26 21:36 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 42+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2001-11-13 9:24 Daniel Jacobowitz
2001-11-13 9:24 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2001-11-13 9:34 ` Kevin Buettner
2001-11-26 18:25 ` Kevin Buettner
2001-11-26 21:07 ` Andrew Cagney
2001-11-13 21:56 ` Andrew Cagney
2001-11-14 22:09 ` Jim Blandy
2001-11-27 12:48 ` Jim Blandy
2001-11-26 18:02 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2001-11-13 18:02 ` Jim Blandy
2001-11-14 9:33 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2001-11-14 22:39 ` Jim Blandy
2001-11-14 22:41 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2001-11-27 13:26 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2001-11-21 13:03 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2001-11-22 13:53 ` Jim Blandy
2001-11-30 11:42 ` Jim Blandy
2001-11-29 22:41 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2001-11-30 8:48 ` Andrew Cagney
2001-11-21 17:30 ` Andrew Cagney
2001-11-30 8:57 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2001-11-21 23:07 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2001-11-27 13:16 ` Jim Blandy
2001-11-26 23:08 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2001-11-26 20:38 ` Jim Blandy
2001-11-26 21:36 ` Daniel Jacobowitz [this message]
2001-11-14 0:12 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2001-11-26 22:05 ` Daniel Berlin
2001-11-14 0:15 ` Daniel Berlin
2001-11-27 7:15 ` Jim Blandy
2001-11-14 13:02 ` Jim Blandy
2001-11-27 7:45 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2001-11-14 13:55 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2001-11-26 17:19 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2001-11-15 14:06 Michael Elizabeth Chastain
2001-11-16 11:52 ` Daniel Berlin
2001-11-27 20:49 ` Daniel Berlin
2001-11-27 20:38 ` Michael Elizabeth Chastain
2001-11-30 9:00 Michael Elizabeth Chastain
2001-11-21 23:07 ` Michael Elizabeth Chastain
2001-11-22 3:17 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2001-11-30 9:52 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20011127003659.A3965@nevyn.them.org \
--to=drow@mvista.com \
--cc=gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com \
--cc=jimb@zwingli.cygnus.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox