From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from simark.ca by simark.ca with LMTP id +FPSCQBaT2e15AIAWB0awg (envelope-from ) for ; Tue, 03 Dec 2024 14:20:32 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=simark.ca; s=mail; t=1733253632; bh=upmb2iKzjEl9SR+KGlvgqU9uacGLtb6AI8BiwwyBHpM=; h=Date:Subject:To:References:From:In-Reply-To:List-Id: List-Unsubscribe:List-Archive:List-Post:List-Help:List-Subscribe: From; b=HCYmntNHdkqYO07VL/V8ga6d2hAO11inyEVs9fQzEiZ7lsYFSpOAKeryuPYJhGJfm I1IHLvShrpCHwNO9+azJumoLGfxY+A5UAcpfxCQUAt4qTdt5TOsBpHAWfzaej0tfVV 0nl5QF6dhilFp594llYnvgvUiubJh1ebJ/rgvdUY= Received: by simark.ca (Postfix, from userid 112) id 253591E0BB; Tue, 3 Dec 2024 14:20:32 -0500 (EST) X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0 (2022-12-13) on simark.ca X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.4 required=5.0 tests=ARC_SIGNED,ARC_VALID,BAYES_00, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=4.0.0 Authentication-Results: simark.ca; dkim=pass (1024-bit key; unprotected) header.d=simark.ca header.i=@simark.ca header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=mail header.b=oPV222vp; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=simark.ca header.i=@simark.ca header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=mail header.b=oPV222vp; dkim-atps=neutral Received: from server2.sourceware.org (server2.sourceware.org [8.43.85.97]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (prime256v1) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by simark.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AF2DD1E05C for ; Tue, 3 Dec 2024 14:20:31 -0500 (EST) Received: from server2.sourceware.org (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4E97A3858C50 for ; Tue, 3 Dec 2024 19:20:31 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 4E97A3858C50 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key, unprotected) header.d=simark.ca header.i=@simark.ca header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=mail header.b=oPV222vp; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=simark.ca header.i=@simark.ca header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=mail header.b=oPV222vp Received: from simark.ca (simark.ca [158.69.221.121]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3B16E3858D33 for ; Tue, 3 Dec 2024 19:19:59 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 sourceware.org 3B16E3858D33 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=simark.ca Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=simark.ca ARC-Filter: OpenARC Filter v1.0.0 sourceware.org 3B16E3858D33 Authentication-Results: server2.sourceware.org; arc=none smtp.remote-ip=158.69.221.121 ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=sourceware.org; s=key; t=1733253599; cv=none; b=ftRAJjHRXs3myUUHWNfHkCW56uDDxU5JYaADahZCh3jOBvHWRgMMl4Z8uhGafJCMu7w+7RBSjdYapsGRd7Nr21hydb122DpOgNjMZFd7gJM4obmycL4+3FM+uMvPilmBN9zSae7CuqpU6oqF32ru0xqzFseJ0X3q64TOP1qxb9w= ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=sourceware.org; s=key; t=1733253599; c=relaxed/simple; bh=upmb2iKzjEl9SR+KGlvgqU9uacGLtb6AI8BiwwyBHpM=; h=DKIM-Signature:DKIM-Signature:Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version: Subject:To:From; b=cXtIIokwCn7ufb674sUpuSxXZpXFn2tDSnwvqCZhH6IyjwwL3pxgt68RqTRM+5lxJEjfky9Ram05RFpVsNQj1E7FAXKsABTh04WStRtskmvw4wzu9NtK2l10+BNmMJPkE14AMrTjx8T5l2ISN9H9bOnCe6QUVkHBWtgHKjbN7bs= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; server2.sourceware.org DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 3B16E3858D33 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=simark.ca; s=mail; t=1733253598; bh=upmb2iKzjEl9SR+KGlvgqU9uacGLtb6AI8BiwwyBHpM=; h=Date:Subject:To:References:From:In-Reply-To:From; b=oPV222vpLgH9z2ucYtZgnA0hq9zEDIKI78niJVRTtuSQ4HAAAuVbgBgFltIaXNOwY uOUaMdNNP1NwhYlHGj8tVYsyPBwPK5IK0vR5gdHydkr9n1+F+qVIG+mPivbu7LIGl8 nv82BgG5gLTcypCO+IPmt8GTHXRzUMDPI11sDjNI= Received: by simark.ca (Postfix, from userid 112) id A461F1E0BB; Tue, 3 Dec 2024 14:19:58 -0500 (EST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=simark.ca; s=mail; t=1733253598; bh=upmb2iKzjEl9SR+KGlvgqU9uacGLtb6AI8BiwwyBHpM=; h=Date:Subject:To:References:From:In-Reply-To:From; b=oPV222vpLgH9z2ucYtZgnA0hq9zEDIKI78niJVRTtuSQ4HAAAuVbgBgFltIaXNOwY uOUaMdNNP1NwhYlHGj8tVYsyPBwPK5IK0vR5gdHydkr9n1+F+qVIG+mPivbu7LIGl8 nv82BgG5gLTcypCO+IPmt8GTHXRzUMDPI11sDjNI= Received: from [10.0.0.11] (modemcable238.237-201-24.mc.videotron.ca [24.201.237.238]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (prime256v1) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by simark.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 0136B1E05C; Tue, 3 Dec 2024 14:19:57 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <4dc6cc85-f189-4102-bb6c-66f8f652f3a2@simark.ca> Date: Tue, 3 Dec 2024 14:19:57 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: [PATCH] gdb: restore nullptr check in compunit_symtab::find_call_site To: Tom de Vries , Simon Marchi , gdb-patches@sourceware.org References: <20241203155223.10203-1-simon.marchi@efficios.com> <423ec6a9-f6ba-4461-8223-cde3211532a0@suse.de> Content-Language: en-US From: Simon Marchi In-Reply-To: <423ec6a9-f6ba-4461-8223-cde3211532a0@suse.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-BeenThere: gdb-patches@sourceware.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.30 Precedence: list List-Id: Gdb-patches mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: gdb-patches-bounces~public-inbox=simark.ca@sourceware.org On 2024-12-03 11:17, Tom de Vries wrote: > On 12/3/24 16:52, Simon Marchi wrote: >> Commit de2b4ab50de ("Convert dwarf2_cu::call_site_htab to new hash >> table") removed this nullptr check for no good reason. This causes a >> crash if `m_call_site_htab` is not set, as shown in PR 32410. My guess >> is that when doing this change, I tried to make `m_call_site_htab` not a >> pointer, removed this check, then realized it wasn't so obvious, and >> forgot to re-add the check. >> > > Hi Simon, > > thanks for the quick fix. > > I've tested it with the test-case on which the PR was reported, and gdb no longer crashes. The test-case still produces two FAILs, but that looks unrelated. > > LGTM. > > Approved-By: Tom de Vries Thanks, pushed. Simon