From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 24100 invoked by alias); 24 Aug 2003 16:53:38 -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 24093 invoked from network); 24 Aug 2003 16:53:38 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO nevyn.them.org) (66.93.172.17) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 24 Aug 2003 16:53:38 -0000 Received: from drow by nevyn.them.org with local (Exim 4.20 #1 (Debian)) id 19qy7V-0004fL-Nf for ; Sun, 24 Aug 2003 12:53:37 -0400 Date: Sun, 24 Aug 2003 16:53:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [commit/6.0?] Sanity check in baseclass_offset Message-ID: <20030824165337.GB17841@nevyn.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com References: <20030822204825.GA11440@nevyn.them.org> <3F48AF92.8090007@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <3F48AF92.8090007@redhat.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.1i X-SW-Source: 2003-08/txt/msg00424.txt.bz2 On Sun, Aug 24, 2003 at 08:29:06AM -0400, Andrew Cagney wrote: > >If we don't have, for whatever reason, debugging information for a base > >class, TYPE_VPTR_FIELDNO may be -1. TYPE_FIELDS may also be NULL. When we > >access 0[-1], we segfault. This patch conditionalizes the sanity check > >with > >another sanity check. > > > >OK to move this onto the 6.0 branch, given schedule? Checked into HEAD, no > >regressions. > > I think so. Checked in on the branch, thanks. -- Daniel Jacobowitz MontaVista Software Debian GNU/Linux Developer