Re: [PATCH v2 1/6] gdb/record: Refactor record history

[Guinevere Larsen <guinevere@redhat.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1386 bytes --]

On 5/13/26 4:54 AM, Schimpe, Christina wrote:
>>>>>> +  record_full_incomplete_instruction.effects.shrink_to_fit ();
>>>>>> +  record_full_list.push_back (record_full_incomplete_instruction);
>>> I think this line will at some point call the default copy constructor of
>> record_full_mem_entry
>>> and record_full_reg_entry, which have those buffers:
>>>
>>> gdb_byte buf[sizeof (gdb_byte *)];
>>>
>>> IIUC you'll only have a shallow copy. Should we use a std::move instead
>> here?
>> Might be worth, yeah...
>>> I further wonder if this problem might be related to the double free issues
>> you
>>> describe in patch #3. Would you mind checking?
>> I did check it! When I was working on patch #3, I disabled copy
>> construction, only allowed move constructor/assignment because I
>> specifically thought that the vector push_back was the reason for the
>> double frees, but it still happened.
> That's weird, it would have perfectly explained it.
> So with std::move we still have this problem?
> Would you mind sharing some backtrace of this double free error ?

Huh... I guess I must have done something wrong when I tried this the 
last time

I just redid the changes to make the cleanup function into the 
destructors and now things just worked. I'll polish it a bit and send a 
v3 with that update! Thanks for getting me to try it again :)

-- 
Cheers,
Guinevere Larsen
It/she

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 2730 bytes --]