* [commit] py-prettyprint.c, val may be null
@ 2011-03-01 21:04 Michael Snyder
2011-03-01 21:24 ` Pedro Alves
0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Michael Snyder @ 2011-03-01 21:04 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gdb-patches
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 12 bytes --]
checked in
[-- Attachment #2: reversenull5.txt --]
[-- Type: text/plain, Size: 856 bytes --]
2011-03-01 Michael Snyder <msnyder@vmware.com>
* python/py-prettyprint.c (apply_val_pretty_printer): VAL may
be null.
Index: python/py-prettyprint.c
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvs/src/src/gdb/python/py-prettyprint.c,v
retrieving revision 1.21
diff -u -p -u -p -r1.21 py-prettyprint.c
--- python/py-prettyprint.c 14 Feb 2011 11:10:53 -0000 1.21
+++ python/py-prettyprint.c 1 Mar 2011 21:02:05 -0000
@@ -692,7 +692,8 @@ apply_val_pretty_printer (struct type *t
enum string_repr_result print_result;
/* No pretty-printer support for unavailable values. */
- if (!value_bytes_available (val, embedded_offset, TYPE_LENGTH (type)))
+ if (val && !value_bytes_available (val, embedded_offset,
+ TYPE_LENGTH (type)))
return 0;
cleanups = ensure_python_env (gdbarch, language);
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: [commit] py-prettyprint.c, val may be null
2011-03-01 21:04 [commit] py-prettyprint.c, val may be null Michael Snyder
@ 2011-03-01 21:24 ` Pedro Alves
2011-03-01 21:41 ` Michael Snyder
0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Pedro Alves @ 2011-03-01 21:24 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gdb-patches; +Cc: Michael Snyder
On Tuesday 01 March 2011 21:04:49, Michael Snyder wrote:
> 2011-03-01 Michael Snyder <msnyder@vmware.com>
>
> * python/py-prettyprint.c (apply_val_pretty_printer): VAL may
> be null.
How? I think it could a while ago, but not anymore. I've recently
made sure val_print always gets a non-NULL value, and we'd now
crash elsewhere otherwise.
--
Pedro Alves
>
> Index: python/py-prettyprint.c
> ===================================================================
> RCS file: /cvs/src/src/gdb/python/py-prettyprint.c,v
> retrieving revision 1.21
> diff -u -p -u -p -r1.21 py-prettyprint.c
> --- python/py-prettyprint.c 14 Feb 2011 11:10:53 -0000 1.21
> +++ python/py-prettyprint.c 1 Mar 2011 21:02:05 -0000
> @@ -692,7 +692,8 @@ apply_val_pretty_printer (struct type *t
> enum string_repr_result print_result;
>
> /* No pretty-printer support for unavailable values. */
> - if (!value_bytes_available (val, embedded_offset, TYPE_LENGTH (type)))
> + if (val && !value_bytes_available (val, embedded_offset,
> + TYPE_LENGTH (type)))
> return 0;
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: [commit] py-prettyprint.c, val may be null
2011-03-01 21:24 ` Pedro Alves
@ 2011-03-01 21:41 ` Michael Snyder
2011-03-01 21:46 ` Pedro Alves
0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Michael Snyder @ 2011-03-01 21:41 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Pedro Alves; +Cc: gdb-patches
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 535 bytes --]
Pedro Alves wrote:
> On Tuesday 01 March 2011 21:04:49, Michael Snyder wrote:
>> 2011-03-01 Michael Snyder <msnyder@vmware.com>
>>
>> * python/py-prettyprint.c (apply_val_pretty_printer): VAL may
>> be null.
>
> How?
Coverity assumes it may be null if it's checked for null.
> I think it could a while ago, but not anymore. I've recently
> made sure val_print always gets a non-NULL value, and we'd now
> crash elsewhere otherwise.
>
In that case, the later check for null is superfluous.
Is this better?
[-- Attachment #2: reversenull7.txt --]
[-- Type: text/plain, Size: 1888 bytes --]
2011-03-01 Michael Snyder <msnyder@msnyder-server.eng.vmware.com>
* python/py-prettyprint.c (apply_val_pretty_printer): Remove
superfluous null check.
Index: python/py-prettyprint.c
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvs/src/src/gdb/python/py-prettyprint.c,v
retrieving revision 1.22
diff -u -p -u -p -r1.22 py-prettyprint.c
--- python/py-prettyprint.c 1 Mar 2011 21:03:22 -0000 1.22
+++ python/py-prettyprint.c 1 Mar 2011 21:38:59 -0000
@@ -692,8 +692,7 @@ apply_val_pretty_printer (struct type *t
enum string_repr_result print_result;
/* No pretty-printer support for unavailable values. */
- if (val && !value_bytes_available (val, embedded_offset,
- TYPE_LENGTH (type)))
+ if (!value_bytes_available (val, embedded_offset, TYPE_LENGTH (type)))
return 0;
cleanups = ensure_python_env (gdbarch, language);
@@ -703,16 +702,14 @@ apply_val_pretty_printer (struct type *t
valaddr += embedded_offset;
value = value_from_contents_and_address (type, valaddr,
address + embedded_offset);
- if (val != NULL)
- {
- set_value_component_location (value, val);
- /* set_value_component_location resets the address, so we may
- need to set it again. */
- if (VALUE_LVAL (value) != lval_internalvar
- && VALUE_LVAL (value) != lval_internalvar_component
- && VALUE_LVAL (value) != lval_computed)
- set_value_address (value, address + embedded_offset);
- }
+
+ set_value_component_location (value, val);
+ /* set_value_component_location resets the address, so we may
+ need to set it again. */
+ if (VALUE_LVAL (value) != lval_internalvar
+ && VALUE_LVAL (value) != lval_internalvar_component
+ && VALUE_LVAL (value) != lval_computed)
+ set_value_address (value, address + embedded_offset);
val_obj = value_to_value_object (value);
if (! val_obj)
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: [commit] py-prettyprint.c, val may be null
2011-03-01 21:41 ` Michael Snyder
@ 2011-03-01 21:46 ` Pedro Alves
2011-03-01 21:55 ` Michael Snyder
0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Pedro Alves @ 2011-03-01 21:46 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gdb-patches; +Cc: Michael Snyder
On Tuesday 01 March 2011 21:40:56, Michael Snyder wrote:
> In that case, the later check for null is superfluous.
> Is this better?
Yes, I think so.
--
Pedro Alves
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: [commit] py-prettyprint.c, val may be null
2011-03-01 21:46 ` Pedro Alves
@ 2011-03-01 21:55 ` Michael Snyder
0 siblings, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: Michael Snyder @ 2011-03-01 21:55 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Pedro Alves; +Cc: gdb-patches
Pedro Alves wrote:
> On Tuesday 01 March 2011 21:40:56, Michael Snyder wrote:
>
>> In that case, the later check for null is superfluous.
>> Is this better?
>
> Yes, I think so.
>
Thanks, checked in.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2011-03-01 21:55 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2011-03-01 21:04 [commit] py-prettyprint.c, val may be null Michael Snyder
2011-03-01 21:24 ` Pedro Alves
2011-03-01 21:41 ` Michael Snyder
2011-03-01 21:46 ` Pedro Alves
2011-03-01 21:55 ` Michael Snyder
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox