Re: RFA: Add xmalloc_failed() to common-utils.c

Re: RFA: Add xmalloc_failed() to common-utils.c

[Pedro Alves]

On 06/01/2016 10:18 AM, Nick Clifton wrote:
> Hi Guys,
> 
>   I am finding that GDB currently fails to build because of a problem
>   with libiberty and multiple definitions of xmalloc.  For example:
> 
>     % cd arm-eabi
>     % make all-gdb
>     [...]
>     ../libiberty/libiberty.a(xmalloc.o): In function `xmalloc':
>     libiberty/xmalloc.c:147: multiple definition of `xmalloc'
>     common-utils.o:/work/sources/gcc/current/gdb/common/common-utils.c:41: first defined here
>     [...]
> 
>   Which is strange because the xmalloc functions provided by
>   common-utils.c ought to be sufficient.  I have traced this down to the
>   fact that libiberty's cplus-dem.o file includes an unresolved reference
>   to the xmalloc_failed() function.  (I am not sure exactly how this
>   reference comes about however).

Sounds like you're using a combined gcc+binutils-gdb build?

Our libiberty copy is behind gcc's -- gcc's has a patch that
added a reference to xmalloc_failed to cplus-dem.c:

  https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-04/msg00072.html

So turns out you're preemptively fixing a problem for whoever
merges libiberty next.

>   The fix for the problem is, I think, quite straightforward - provide a
>   copy of the xmalloc_failed function in common-utils.c.  I have tested
>   this patch with a variety of different targets (x86, x86_64, arm,
>   msp430) and not found any problems or regressions. So...
> 
>   OK to apply ?

OK.

Thanks,
Pedro Alves

Re: RFA: Add xmalloc_failed() to common-utils.c

[Nick Clifton]

Hi Pedro,

> Sounds like you're using a combined gcc+binutils-gdb build?

Yes. :-)

>>   OK to apply ?
> 
> OK.

Thanks - done.

Cheers
  Nick