Mirror of the gdb-patches mailing list
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Ulrich Weigand" <uweigand@de.ibm.com>
To: qiyaoltc@gmail.com (Yao Qi)
Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Assert on lval_register
Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2016 21:16:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20161130211637.BA94710BCB5@oc8523832656.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1480517757-11733-1-git-send-email-yao.qi@linaro.org> from "Yao Qi" at Nov 30, 2016 02:55:57 PM

Yao Qi wrote:

> This patch adds asserts where the value's lval must be lval_register.
> This triggers an error in frame_register_unwind because VALUE_REGNUM
> is used but value's lval is not lval_register.

Makes sense to me.
 
> This also reveals a design issue in frame_register_unwind, that is
> arguments addrp and realnump are mutually exclusive, we either use
> addrp (for lval_memory), or use realnump (for lval_register).  This
> can be done in a separate patch.

I think we should simply get rid of frame_register_unwind.  Callers
should be changed to use frame_unwind_register_value directly, and
just operate on the value.

>    *lvalp = VALUE_LVAL (value);
>    *addrp = value_address (value);
> -  *realnump = VALUE_REGNUM (value);
> +  if (*lvalp == lval_register)
> +    *realnump = VALUE_REGNUM (value);

But as long as the above change is not done yet, maybe we ought to
at least provide a defined value (e.g. -1), to avoid callers maybe
making use of uninitialized variables?

Bye,
Ulrich

-- 
  Dr. Ulrich Weigand
  GNU/Linux compilers and toolchain
  Ulrich.Weigand@de.ibm.com


  reply	other threads:[~2016-11-30 21:16 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-11-30 14:56 Yao Qi
2016-11-30 21:16 ` Ulrich Weigand [this message]
2016-12-06 10:15   ` Yao Qi
2016-12-06 13:13     ` Ulrich Weigand
2016-12-06 14:26       ` Yao Qi

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=20161130211637.BA94710BCB5@oc8523832656.ibm.com \
    --to=uweigand@de.ibm.com \
    --cc=gdb-patches@sourceware.org \
    --cc=qiyaoltc@gmail.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