Mirror of the gdb-patches mailing list
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jan Kratochvil <jan.kratochvil@redhat.com>
To: Paul Koning <paulkoning@comcast.net>
Cc: pmuldoon@redhat.com, gdb-patches@sourceware.org
Subject: Re: Python: fetch value when building gdb.Value object
Date: Sat, 01 Oct 2011 09:05:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20111001090443.GA11227@host1.jankratochvil.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <D9AC6973-91CF-42D4-AD81-0C4A41D3DD2A@comcast.net>

On Wed, 28 Sep 2011 22:40:50 +0200, Paul Koning wrote:
> If I use RETURN_MASK_ERROR and control/C is hit, does that mean the
> currently running code aborts and the outer handler that does have
> RETURN_MASK_ALL is entered?

Yes.

> If so, most of the Python code seems to be a candidate for
> RETURN_MASK_ERROR.

In fact I do not know, it is a Python thing.

RETURN_MASK_ALL is right if returned PyExc_KeyboardInterrupt will really abort
any execution of Python code.  It is probably so, as suggested by:
	http://docs.python.org/library/exceptions.html#exceptions.KeyboardInterrupt

RETURN_MASK_ERROR is right otherwise, but only if it is safe to longjmp out
from a code called by Python.  This may not be true.  Python may be C++
exceptions throwing safe but it cannot be safe for the GDB longjmp exceptions.
But this case would mean Python is buggy for CTRL-C on its own so
RETURN_MASK_ERROR probably is not right.


> One exception is valpy_getitem (in py-value.c) since it has an xfree(value)
> after the TRY_CATCH but before the GDB_PY_HANDLE_EXCEPTION (outside the
> TRY_CATCH block, though -- is that right?)

It is right as long as RETURN_MASK_ALL is right.  It is more usual to call
make_cleanup though - as shown in the attached change.  The change could be
just a code cleanup without functionality change if that RETURN_MASK_ALL is
kept there.


> Probably related: I just tried an infinite Python loop and found that
> control-C had no effect.  I wonder if the Python interpreter is setting up
> its own control-C trap (quite possibly -- that's a Python exception after
> all) and we're losing it somewhere along the lines.

Yes, this is the kind of bug from it, thanks for checking it.


Thanks,
Jan


only FYI, not intended for commit:

gdb/
2011-10-01  Jan Kratochvil  <jan.kratochvil@redhat.com>

	* python/py-value.c (valpy_getitem): New variable back_to.  Register
	xfree of field to it.  Call do_cleanups for it.  Use RETURN_MASK_ERROR
	instead of RETURN_MASK_ALL.

--- a/gdb/python/py-value.c
+++ b/gdb/python/py-value.c
@@ -448,6 +448,7 @@ valpy_getitem (PyObject *self, PyObject *key)
   char *field = NULL;
   struct value *res_val = NULL;
   volatile struct gdb_exception except;
+  struct cleanup *back_to;
 
   if (gdbpy_is_string (key))
     {  
@@ -456,7 +457,9 @@ valpy_getitem (PyObject *self, PyObject *key)
 	return NULL;
     }
 
-  TRY_CATCH (except, RETURN_MASK_ALL)
+  back_to = make_cleanup (xfree, field);
+
+  TRY_CATCH (except, RETURN_MASK_ERROR)
     {
       struct value *tmp = self_value->value;
 
@@ -485,10 +488,10 @@ valpy_getitem (PyObject *self, PyObject *key)
 	    }
 	}
     }
-
-  xfree (field);
   GDB_PY_HANDLE_EXCEPTION (except);
 
+  do_cleanups (back_to);
+
   return res_val ? value_to_value_object (res_val) : NULL;
 }
 


  reply	other threads:[~2011-10-01  9:05 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2011-09-21 16:17 Paul Koning
2011-09-28 19:29 ` Phil Muldoon
2011-09-28 20:06   ` Paul Koning
2011-10-04 15:43     ` Tom Tromey
2011-09-28 20:42   ` Paul Koning
2011-10-01  9:05     ` Jan Kratochvil [this message]
2011-10-03 10:22       ` Phil Muldoon
2011-10-04 15:40       ` Tom Tromey
2011-10-01  9:29   ` Jan Kratochvil
2011-10-01 10:23     ` Pedro Alves
2011-10-01 11:03       ` Jan Kratochvil
2011-10-01 12:17     ` Python: fetch value when building gdb.Value object [rediff] Jan Kratochvil
2011-10-01 18:58       ` Paul Koning
2011-10-03 10:19       ` Phil Muldoon
2011-10-03 16:16         ` Paul Koning
2011-10-01  1:00 ` [PING] [RFA] Re: Python: fetch value when building gdb.Value object Paul Koning
2011-10-04 15:45 ` Tom Tromey
2011-10-04 15:51   ` Paul Koning
2011-10-14 20:03     ` Tom Tromey
2011-10-14 20:30       ` Paul Koning
2011-10-19 20:56         ` Tom Tromey
2011-10-19 20:58           ` Paul Koning
2011-10-20 15:09             ` Tom Tromey
2011-10-21  7:46               ` Paul Koning
2011-10-21 17:13                 ` Tom Tromey
2011-10-14 23:36   ` Jim Blandy

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=20111001090443.GA11227@host1.jankratochvil.net \
    --to=jan.kratochvil@redhat.com \
    --cc=gdb-patches@sourceware.org \
    --cc=paulkoning@comcast.net \
    --cc=pmuldoon@redhat.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