From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 130307 invoked by alias); 22 Nov 2016 18:03:07 -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 130286 invoked by uid 89); 22 Nov 2016 18:03:06 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-4.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy=road 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; Tue, 22 Nov 2016 18:03:05 +0000 Received: from int-mx11.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx11.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.24]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C9CA6CA600; Tue, 22 Nov 2016 18:03:04 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (ovpn03.gateway.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.9.3]) by int-mx11.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id uAMI33UI027020; Tue, 22 Nov 2016 13:03:04 -0500 Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] Set VALUE_VAL before set_value_address To: Yao Qi , gdb-patches@sourceware.org References: <1479829721-22162-1-git-send-email-yao.qi@linaro.org> <1479829721-22162-3-git-send-email-yao.qi@linaro.org> From: Pedro Alves Message-ID: <2ceeb48f-ddf1-ce3e-e555-8a55762aa37c@redhat.com> Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2016 18:03:00 -0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.4.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <1479829721-22162-3-git-send-email-yao.qi@linaro.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2016-11/txt/msg00647.txt.bz2 On 11/22/2016 03:48 PM, Yao Qi wrote: > Since we have a check on VALUE_VAL in set_value_address, we need to > set VALUE_VAL properly before set_value_address. LGTM. I wonder whether it'd be hard to add a new function that takes care of the ordering: struct value *allocate_memory_value (struct type *type, CORE_ADDR address); that would allocate a lazy value with lval == lval_memory and address filled in. We use that instead throughout. This would translate more directly to converting struct value to a class hierarchy down the road, with allocate_memory_value mapping to a struct memory_value constructor. Thanks, Pedro Alves