* [commit] py-prettyprint.c, val may be null
@ 2011-03-01 21:04 Michael Snyder
2011-03-01 21:24 ` Pedro Alves
0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Michael Snyder @ 2011-03-01 21:04 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gdb-patches
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 12 bytes --]
checked in
[-- Attachment #2: reversenull5.txt --]
[-- Type: text/plain, Size: 856 bytes --]
2011-03-01 Michael Snyder <msnyder@vmware.com>
* python/py-prettyprint.c (apply_val_pretty_printer): VAL may
be null.
Index: python/py-prettyprint.c
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvs/src/src/gdb/python/py-prettyprint.c,v
retrieving revision 1.21
diff -u -p -u -p -r1.21 py-prettyprint.c
--- python/py-prettyprint.c 14 Feb 2011 11:10:53 -0000 1.21
+++ python/py-prettyprint.c 1 Mar 2011 21:02:05 -0000
@@ -692,7 +692,8 @@ apply_val_pretty_printer (struct type *t
enum string_repr_result print_result;
/* No pretty-printer support for unavailable values. */
- if (!value_bytes_available (val, embedded_offset, TYPE_LENGTH (type)))
+ if (val && !value_bytes_available (val, embedded_offset,
+ TYPE_LENGTH (type)))
return 0;
cleanups = ensure_python_env (gdbarch, language);
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread* Re: [commit] py-prettyprint.c, val may be null 2011-03-01 21:04 [commit] py-prettyprint.c, val may be null Michael Snyder @ 2011-03-01 21:24 ` Pedro Alves 2011-03-01 21:41 ` Michael Snyder 0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread From: Pedro Alves @ 2011-03-01 21:24 UTC (permalink / raw) To: gdb-patches; +Cc: Michael Snyder On Tuesday 01 March 2011 21:04:49, Michael Snyder wrote: > 2011-03-01 Michael Snyder <msnyder@vmware.com> > > * python/py-prettyprint.c (apply_val_pretty_printer): VAL may > be null. How? I think it could a while ago, but not anymore. I've recently made sure val_print always gets a non-NULL value, and we'd now crash elsewhere otherwise. -- Pedro Alves > > Index: python/py-prettyprint.c > =================================================================== > RCS file: /cvs/src/src/gdb/python/py-prettyprint.c,v > retrieving revision 1.21 > diff -u -p -u -p -r1.21 py-prettyprint.c > --- python/py-prettyprint.c 14 Feb 2011 11:10:53 -0000 1.21 > +++ python/py-prettyprint.c 1 Mar 2011 21:02:05 -0000 > @@ -692,7 +692,8 @@ apply_val_pretty_printer (struct type *t > enum string_repr_result print_result; > > /* No pretty-printer support for unavailable values. */ > - if (!value_bytes_available (val, embedded_offset, TYPE_LENGTH (type))) > + if (val && !value_bytes_available (val, embedded_offset, > + TYPE_LENGTH (type))) > return 0; > ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: [commit] py-prettyprint.c, val may be null 2011-03-01 21:24 ` Pedro Alves @ 2011-03-01 21:41 ` Michael Snyder 2011-03-01 21:46 ` Pedro Alves 0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread From: Michael Snyder @ 2011-03-01 21:41 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Pedro Alves; +Cc: gdb-patches [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 535 bytes --] Pedro Alves wrote: > On Tuesday 01 March 2011 21:04:49, Michael Snyder wrote: >> 2011-03-01 Michael Snyder <msnyder@vmware.com> >> >> * python/py-prettyprint.c (apply_val_pretty_printer): VAL may >> be null. > > How? Coverity assumes it may be null if it's checked for null. > I think it could a while ago, but not anymore. I've recently > made sure val_print always gets a non-NULL value, and we'd now > crash elsewhere otherwise. > In that case, the later check for null is superfluous. Is this better? [-- Attachment #2: reversenull7.txt --] [-- Type: text/plain, Size: 1888 bytes --] 2011-03-01 Michael Snyder <msnyder@msnyder-server.eng.vmware.com> * python/py-prettyprint.c (apply_val_pretty_printer): Remove superfluous null check. Index: python/py-prettyprint.c =================================================================== RCS file: /cvs/src/src/gdb/python/py-prettyprint.c,v retrieving revision 1.22 diff -u -p -u -p -r1.22 py-prettyprint.c --- python/py-prettyprint.c 1 Mar 2011 21:03:22 -0000 1.22 +++ python/py-prettyprint.c 1 Mar 2011 21:38:59 -0000 @@ -692,8 +692,7 @@ apply_val_pretty_printer (struct type *t enum string_repr_result print_result; /* No pretty-printer support for unavailable values. */ - if (val && !value_bytes_available (val, embedded_offset, - TYPE_LENGTH (type))) + if (!value_bytes_available (val, embedded_offset, TYPE_LENGTH (type))) return 0; cleanups = ensure_python_env (gdbarch, language); @@ -703,16 +702,14 @@ apply_val_pretty_printer (struct type *t valaddr += embedded_offset; value = value_from_contents_and_address (type, valaddr, address + embedded_offset); - if (val != NULL) - { - set_value_component_location (value, val); - /* set_value_component_location resets the address, so we may - need to set it again. */ - if (VALUE_LVAL (value) != lval_internalvar - && VALUE_LVAL (value) != lval_internalvar_component - && VALUE_LVAL (value) != lval_computed) - set_value_address (value, address + embedded_offset); - } + + set_value_component_location (value, val); + /* set_value_component_location resets the address, so we may + need to set it again. */ + if (VALUE_LVAL (value) != lval_internalvar + && VALUE_LVAL (value) != lval_internalvar_component + && VALUE_LVAL (value) != lval_computed) + set_value_address (value, address + embedded_offset); val_obj = value_to_value_object (value); if (! val_obj) ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: [commit] py-prettyprint.c, val may be null 2011-03-01 21:41 ` Michael Snyder @ 2011-03-01 21:46 ` Pedro Alves 2011-03-01 21:55 ` Michael Snyder 0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread From: Pedro Alves @ 2011-03-01 21:46 UTC (permalink / raw) To: gdb-patches; +Cc: Michael Snyder On Tuesday 01 March 2011 21:40:56, Michael Snyder wrote: > In that case, the later check for null is superfluous. > Is this better? Yes, I think so. -- Pedro Alves ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: [commit] py-prettyprint.c, val may be null 2011-03-01 21:46 ` Pedro Alves @ 2011-03-01 21:55 ` Michael Snyder 0 siblings, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread From: Michael Snyder @ 2011-03-01 21:55 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Pedro Alves; +Cc: gdb-patches Pedro Alves wrote: > On Tuesday 01 March 2011 21:40:56, Michael Snyder wrote: > >> In that case, the later check for null is superfluous. >> Is this better? > > Yes, I think so. > Thanks, checked in. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2011-03-01 21:55 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 5+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed) -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2011-03-01 21:04 [commit] py-prettyprint.c, val may be null Michael Snyder 2011-03-01 21:24 ` Pedro Alves 2011-03-01 21:41 ` Michael Snyder 2011-03-01 21:46 ` Pedro Alves 2011-03-01 21:55 ` Michael Snyder
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox