From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gdb-patches-return-99719-listarch-gdb-patches=sources.redhat.com@sourceware.org>
Received: (qmail 6968 invoked by alias); 21 Mar 2013 14:20:11 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gdb-patches.sourceware.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gdb-patches-subscribe@sourceware.org>
List-Archive: <http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/>
List-Post: <mailto:gdb-patches@sourceware.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org
Received: (qmail 6192 invoked by uid 89); 21 Mar 2013 14:20:04 -0000
X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-8.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.1
Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28)    by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.84/v0.84-167-ge50287c) with ESMTP; Thu, 21 Mar 2013 14:20:00 +0000
Received: from int-mx02.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx02.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.12])	by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id r2LEJxtx030555	(version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK)	for <gdb-patches@sourceware.org>; Thu, 21 Mar 2013 10:19:59 -0400
Received: from host2.jankratochvil.net (ovpn-116-42.ams2.redhat.com [10.36.116.42])	by int-mx02.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id r2LEJt3n017816	(version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO);	Thu, 21 Mar 2013 10:19:58 -0400
Date: Thu, 21 Mar 2013 14:41:00 -0000
From: Jan Kratochvil <jan.kratochvil@redhat.com>
To: Tom Tromey <tromey@redhat.com>
Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org
Subject: Re: RFC: fix latent bug in syms_from_objfile_1
Message-ID: <20130321141954.GA10644@host2.jankratochvil.net>
References: <87ip4m7wxy.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> <20130320184034.GA708@host2.jankratochvil.net> <87ip4l7swd.fsf@fleche.redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <87ip4l7swd.fsf@fleche.redhat.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
X-IsSubscribed: yes
X-SW-Source: 2013-03/txt/msg00784.txt.bz2

On Wed, 20 Mar 2013 20:50:10 +0100, Tom Tromey wrote:
> --- a/gdb/symfile.c
> +++ b/gdb/symfile.c
[...]
> @@ -205,11 +207,14 @@ alloc_section_addr_info (size_t num_sections)
>    struct section_addr_info *sap;
>    size_t size;
>  
> +  /* Make sure the size calculation turns out ok.  */
> +  if (num_sections == 0)
> +    ++num_sections;

I always thought such sizeof calculation works even with # of elements == 0.
Why not?


> +
>    size = (sizeof (struct section_addr_info)
>  	  +  sizeof (struct other_sections) * (num_sections - 1));
>    sap = (struct section_addr_info *) xmalloc (size);
>    memset (sap, 0, size);
> -  sap->num_sections = num_sections;
>  
>    return sap;
>  }


I am OK with the patch, thanks for the cleanup waiting for so many years.


Jan