From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 21967 invoked by alias); 26 Oct 2018 04:03:19 -0000 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 Received: (qmail 21946 invoked by uid 89); 26 Oct 2018 04:03:18 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,SPF_HELO_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy= X-HELO: mx1.redhat.com Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Fri, 26 Oct 2018 04:03:17 +0000 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx03.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.13]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 26A428046C for ; Fri, 26 Oct 2018 04:03:16 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pinnacle.lan (ovpn-116-78.phx2.redhat.com [10.3.116.78]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F3046648BF; Fri, 26 Oct 2018 04:03:14 +0000 (UTC) Date: Fri, 26 Oct 2018 04:03:00 -0000 From: Kevin Buettner To: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Cc: Sergio Durigan Junior Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix thinko on common/offset-type.h (compare 'lhs' against 'rhs') Message-ID: <20181025210312.143b91aa@pinnacle.lan> In-Reply-To: <20181025211008.12164-1-sergiodj@redhat.com> References: <20181025211008.12164-1-sergiodj@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2018-10/txt/msg00609.txt.bz2 On Thu, 25 Oct 2018 17:10:08 -0400 Sergio Durigan Junior wrote: > While doing something else, I noticed that the OFFSET_TYPE's > "DEFINE_OFFSET_REL_OP" has a thinko: it is comparing 'lhs' against > itself, instead of against 'rhs'. This patch fixes it. > > I also found an interesting thing. We have an unittest for > offset-type, and in theory it should have caught this problem, because > it has tests for relational operators. However, the tests > successfully pass, and after some investigation I'm almost sure this > is because these operators are not being properly overloaded. I tried > a few things to make them be used, without success. If someone wants > to give this a try, I'd appreciate. > > No regressions introduced. > > gdb/ChangeLog: > 2018-10-25 Sergio Durigan Junior > > * common/offset-type.h (DEFINE_OFFSET_REL_OP): Compare 'lhs' > against 'rhs', instead of with 'lhs' again. LGTM. (I'm surprised that it wasn't caught by the unit test or by someone else noticing a bug elsewhere in GDB.) Kevin