From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 7070 invoked by alias); 28 Jul 2009 14:46:32 -0000 Received: (qmail 7059 invoked by uid 22791); 28 Jul 2009 14:46:31 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.5 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from qnxmail.qnx.com (HELO qnxmail.qnx.com) (209.226.137.76) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Tue, 28 Jul 2009 14:46:24 +0000 Received: from Nebula.ott.qnx.com (nebula.ott.qnx.com [10.42.3.30]) by hub.ott.qnx.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id KAA09530; Tue, 28 Jul 2009 10:46:17 -0400 Received: from [127.0.0.1] ([10.42.161.192]) by Nebula.ott.qnx.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Tue, 28 Jul 2009 10:46:21 -0400 Message-ID: <4A6F0F05.1060705@qnx.com> Date: Tue, 28 Jul 2009 15:06:00 -0000 From: Aleksandar Ristovski User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.22 (Windows/20090605) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Pedro Alves CC: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [patch] Set bfd field in target_section References: <200907281534.41605.pedro@codesourcery.com> In-Reply-To: <200907281534.41605.pedro@codesourcery.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit 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: 2009-07/txt/msg00679.txt.bz2 Pedro Alves wrote: > On Tuesday 28 July 2009 15:28:33, Aleksandar Ristovski wrote: >> Hello, >> >> I believe this is related to Pedro's patch from 03-Jun-09. I >> didn't see where we set target_section.bfd field - maybe I >> am overlooking something, but in bfd-target, in function >> target_bfd_xclose we will call bfd_close >> (table->sections->bfd); bfd_close doesn't like NULL argument. >> >> Am I missing something, or is this (the patch) missing? > > Doesn't add_to_section_table set the bfd in each new > target section? Indeed it does. However, the problem is if we don't find any sections in a bfd, it will exit and will leave bfd field 0. I get this situation at the moment because I broke my xfer_partial, but I think it could happen in general? --- Aleksandar