Mirror of the gdb-patches mailing list
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Sergio Durigan Junior <sergiodj@redhat.com>
To: Tom Tromey <tom@tromey.com>
Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org
Subject: Re: [RFC] Avoid crash when calling warning too early
Date: Sat, 06 Oct 2018 19:32:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <87woquq3b7.fsf@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20181006192007.1945-1-tom@tromey.com> (Tom Tromey's message of	"Sat, 6 Oct 2018 13:20:07 -0600")

On Saturday, October 06 2018, Tom Tromey wrote:

> I happened to notice that if you pass the name of an existing file
> (not a directory) as the argument to --data-directory, gdb will crash:
>
>     $ ./gdb -nx  --data-directory  ./gdb
>     ../../binutils-gdb/gdb/target.c:590:56: runtime error: member call on null pointer of type 'struct target_ops'
>
> This happens because warning ends up calling
> target_supports_terminal_ours, which calls current_top_target, which
> returns nullptr this early.
>
> This fixes the problem by handling this case specially in
> target_supports_terminal_ours.
>
> I wasn't sure whether this warranted a test case, hence the RFC.

Thanks for the patch.  I remember stumbling upon this issue a while ago,
and had a similar patch to fix it, but I think I forgot to submit it.

> gdb/ChangeLog
> 2018-10-06  Tom Tromey  <tom@tromey.com>
>
> 	* target.c (target_supports_terminal_ours): Handle case where
> 	current_top_target returns nullptr.
> ---
>  gdb/ChangeLog | 5 +++++
>  gdb/target.c  | 5 +++++
>  2 files changed, 10 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/gdb/target.c b/gdb/target.c
> index 2d98954b54..a261155f29 100644
> --- a/gdb/target.c
> +++ b/gdb/target.c
> @@ -587,6 +587,11 @@ target_terminal::info (const char *arg, int from_tty)
>  int
>  target_supports_terminal_ours (void)
>  {
> +  /* This can be called before there is any target, so we must check
> +     for nullptr here.  */
> +  target_ops *top = current_top_target ();
> +  if (top == nullptr)
> +    return false;
>    return current_top_target ()->supports_terminal_ours ();
>  }

The patch looks good to me.  My only question is about whether we still
require a newline between variable declarations and the rest of the
code.  I still follow this rule (because I think it improves code
readability), but now with C++11 I'm not sure if it's still being
enforced.

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/


  reply	other threads:[~2018-10-06 19:32 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2018-10-06 19:20 Tom Tromey
2018-10-06 19:32 ` Sergio Durigan Junior [this message]
2018-10-06 21:13   ` Tom Tromey

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=87woquq3b7.fsf@redhat.com \
    --to=sergiodj@redhat.com \
    --cc=gdb-patches@sourceware.org \
    --cc=tom@tromey.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox