From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 77253 invoked by alias); 21 Mar 2019 22:05:53 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 76690 invoked by uid 89); 21 Mar 2019 22:05:52 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.6 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,KAM_NUMSUBJECT,SPF_HELO_PASS autolearn=no version=3.3.1 spammy=sergio, Sergio, 237A, 18th X-HELO: mx1.redhat.com Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Thu, 21 Mar 2019 22:05:51 +0000 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx08.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.23]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 79F70307D844; Thu, 21 Mar 2019 22:05:50 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (unused-10-15-17-196.yyz.redhat.com [10.15.17.196]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 51C4F19C59; Thu, 21 Mar 2019 22:05:50 +0000 (UTC) From: Sergio Durigan Junior To: Tom Tromey Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] Merge handle_inferior_event and handle_inferior_event_1 References: <20190320140846.13031-1-tromey@adacore.com> Date: Thu, 21 Mar 2019 22:05:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: <20190320140846.13031-1-tromey@adacore.com> (Tom Tromey's message of "Wed, 20 Mar 2019 08:08:46 -0600") Message-ID: <87r2azkhmq.fsf@redhat.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.1 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2019-03/txt/msg00475.txt.bz2 On Wednesday, March 20 2019, Tom Tromey wrote: > I noticed that handle_inferior_event is just a small wrapper that > frees the value chain. This patch replaces it with a > scoped_value_mark, reducing the number of lines of code here. > > Regression tested on x86-64 Fedora 29. A few days ago (March 18th) a user reported a bug against Fedora GDB: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1690120 And, after hours and hours investigating this, I found that your commit actually fixes it. Not sure if it was intended or not, but what a coincidence... Thanks, -- Sergio GPG key ID: 237A 54B1 0287 28BF 00EF 31F4 D0EB 7628 65FC 5E36 Please send encrypted e-mail if possible http://sergiodj.net/