From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 13369 invoked by alias); 5 Feb 2013 21:14:45 -0000 Received: (qmail 13359 invoked by uid 22791); 5 Feb 2013 21:14:44 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-5.5 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,KAM_STOCKGEN,KHOP_RCVD_UNTRUST,KHOP_SPAMHAUS_DROP,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_W,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS 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, 05 Feb 2013 21:14:39 +0000 Received: from int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.22]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id r15LEd10010333 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK) for ; Tue, 5 Feb 2013 16:14:39 -0500 Received: from host2.jankratochvil.net (ovpn-116-18.ams2.redhat.com [10.36.116.18]) by int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id r15LEZUI001084 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Tue, 5 Feb 2013 16:14:38 -0500 Date: Tue, 05 Feb 2013 21:14:00 -0000 From: Jan Kratochvil To: Tom Tromey Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [patch] Fix gdb.fortran/common-block.exp crash in PIE mode Message-ID: <20130205211435.GA27223@host2.jankratochvil.net> References: <20130119224534.GA26330@host2.jankratochvil.net> <874nia4iri.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <874nia4iri.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) 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: 2013-02/txt/msg00130.txt.bz2 On Mon, 21 Jan 2013 17:12:49 +0100, Tom Tromey wrote: > Perhaps the various symbol-value accessors like SYMBOL_VALUE_ADDRESS > should make assertions about the address class. This is what GCC does > in its tree accessors. > > Like > > #define SYMBOL_VALUE_COMMON_BLOCK(symbol) \ > ((gdb_assert (SYMBOL_CLASS (symbol) == LOC_COMMON_BLOCK)), \ > (symbol)->info.value.common_block) Unfortunately these macros are used also for minimal_symbol which does not have SYMBOL_CLASS. This is another sanity check which can be implemented after -Wc++-compat gets checked in. Jan