Re: [PATCH 2 PR gdb/16959] gdb hangs in infinite recursion

[Simon Marchi <simon.marchi@ericsson.com>]

On 2018-03-22 01:41 PM, Weimin Pan wrote:
> The original problem was fixed (see related PR 22242). But using a typedef
> as the declared type for a static member variable, as commented in this PR,
> is still causing gdb to get into infinite loop when printing the static
> member's value. This problem can be reproduced as follows:
> 
> % cat t.cc
> class A {
>     typedef A type;
> public:
>     bool operator==(const type& other) { return true; }
> 
>     static const type INSTANCE;
> };
> 
> const A A::INSTANCE;
> 
> int main() {
>     A a;
>     if (a == A::INSTANCE) {
>         return -1;
>     }
>     return 0;
> }
> % g++ -g t.cc
> % gdb -ex "start" -ex "p a" a.out
> 
> The fix is rather trivial - in cp_print_static_field(), should call
> check_typedef() to get the static member's real type and use it to
> check whether it's a struct or an array.
> 
> Added a new test case to the testsuite as Simon suggested.
> 
> Tested on both aarch64-linux-gnu and amd64-linux-gnu. No regressions.
> ---
> ---
>  gdb/ChangeLog                                 |    7 ++++
>  gdb/cp-valprint.c                             |    2 +-
>  gdb/testsuite/ChangeLog                       |    5 +++
>  gdb/testsuite/gdb.cp/static-typedef-print.cc  |   35 +++++++++++++++++++++
>  gdb/testsuite/gdb.cp/static-typedef-print.exp |   40 +++++++++++++++++++++++++
>  5 files changed, 88 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
>  create mode 100644 gdb/testsuite/gdb.cp/static-typedef-print.cc
>  create mode 100644 gdb/testsuite/gdb.cp/static-typedef-print.exp
> 
> diff --git a/gdb/ChangeLog b/gdb/ChangeLog
> index d0a8dfd..6fd43de 100644
> --- a/gdb/ChangeLog
> +++ b/gdb/ChangeLog
> @@ -1,3 +1,10 @@
> +2018-02-07  Weimin Pan  <weimin.pan@oracle.com>
> +
> +	PR gdb/16959
> +	* cp-valprint.c: (cp_print_static_field) Use check_typedef() to get 
> +	static member's real type for TYPE_CODE_STRUCT and TYPE_CODE_ARRAY 
> +	comparisons. 
> +
>  2018-01-24  Pedro Alves  <palves@redhat.com>
>  
>  	GCC PR libstdc++/83906
> diff --git a/gdb/cp-valprint.c b/gdb/cp-valprint.c
> index 486653f..0370b56 100644
> --- a/gdb/cp-valprint.c
> +++ b/gdb/cp-valprint.c
> @@ -633,6 +633,7 @@ cp_print_static_field (struct type *type,
>        return;
>      }
>  
> +  type = check_typedef (type);
>    if (TYPE_CODE (type) == TYPE_CODE_STRUCT)
>      {
>        CORE_ADDR *first_dont_print;
> @@ -658,7 +659,6 @@ cp_print_static_field (struct type *type,
>        addr = value_address (val);
>        obstack_grow (&dont_print_statmem_obstack, (char *) &addr,
>  		    sizeof (CORE_ADDR));
> -      type = check_typedef (type);
>        cp_print_value_fields (type, value_enclosing_type (val),
>  			     value_embedded_offset (val), addr,
>  			     stream, recurse, val,

I pointed this out in my previous mail:

type is passed below to val_print.  I think it would be better to continue
passing the original type to that function instead of the resolved type.  It
could affect how things are printed (if the type name is printed somewhere,
or if pretty printers are involved).  Many functions use a variable "real_type"
to hold the result from check_typedef, you could follow that pattern.

Did you have a chance to take a look?

Simon