From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 3561 invoked by alias); 1 Jun 2010 17:58:25 -0000 Received: (qmail 3553 invoked by uid 22791); 1 Jun 2010 17:58:25 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-5.7 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,SPF_HELO_PASS,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Tue, 01 Jun 2010 17:58:13 +0000 Received: from int-mx04.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx04.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.17]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id o51HwC1j019661 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK) for ; Tue, 1 Jun 2010 13:58:12 -0400 Received: from host0.dyn.jankratochvil.net (ovpn01.gateway.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.9.1]) by int-mx04.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id o51Hw9Er028556 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Tue, 1 Jun 2010 13:58:11 -0400 Received: from host0.dyn.jankratochvil.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by host0.dyn.jankratochvil.net (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id o51Hw9k0028414; Tue, 1 Jun 2010 19:58:09 +0200 Received: (from jkratoch@localhost) by host0.dyn.jankratochvil.net (8.14.4/8.14.4/Submit) id o51Hw87Q028413; Tue, 1 Jun 2010 19:58:08 +0200 Date: Tue, 01 Jun 2010 17:58:00 -0000 From: Jan Kratochvil To: Mark Kettenis Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [rfc patch] nomem: internal_error -> error Message-ID: <20100601175808.GA28301@host0.dyn.jankratochvil.net> References: <20100601164808.GA22487@host0.dyn.jankratochvil.net> <201006011755.o51HtepM012252@glazunov.sibelius.xs4all.nl> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <201006011755.o51HtepM012252@glazunov.sibelius.xs4all.nl> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-12-10) X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2010-06/txt/msg00009.txt.bz2 On Tue, 01 Jun 2010 19:55:40 +0200, Mark Kettenis wrote: > > (gdb) print a > > ../../gdb/utils.c:1251: internal-error: virtual memory exhausted: can't allocate 4294951689 bytes. > > > > I find simple error as a perfectly reasonable there. > > I disagree; this internal-error really is a bug in GDB. We should > never try to allocate that much memory. So that even if the object is really so large in the inferior GDB should be fixed to read+process the object in multiple parts? That makes sense. Thanks, Jan