From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 32356 invoked by alias); 25 Oct 2017 02:23:44 -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 32345 invoked by uid 89); 25 Oct 2017 02:23:43 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-2.4 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy=HContent-Transfer-Encoding:8bit X-HELO: smtp.polymtl.ca Received: from smtp.polymtl.ca (HELO smtp.polymtl.ca) (132.207.4.11) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Wed, 25 Oct 2017 02:23:42 +0000 Received: from simark.ca (simark.ca [158.69.221.121]) (authenticated bits=0) by smtp.polymtl.ca (8.14.7/8.14.7) with ESMTP id v9P2NZw2014304 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT) for ; Tue, 24 Oct 2017 22:23:40 -0400 Received: by simark.ca (Postfix, from userid 112) id 4B5251E521; Tue, 24 Oct 2017 22:23:35 -0400 (EDT) Received: from simark.ca (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by simark.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 777751E4F3; Tue, 24 Oct 2017 22:23:23 -0400 (EDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2017 02:23:00 -0000 From: Simon Marchi To: Patrick Frants Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix broken recursion detection when printing static members In-Reply-To: <20171024105535.13287-1-osscontribute@gmail.com> References: <20171024105535.13287-1-osscontribute@gmail.com> Message-ID: X-Sender: simon.marchi@polymtl.ca User-Agent: Roundcube Webmail/1.3.0 X-Poly-FromMTA: (simark.ca [158.69.221.121]) at Wed, 25 Oct 2017 02:23:35 +0000 X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2017-10/txt/msg00752.txt.bz2 On 2017-10-24 06:55, Patrick Frants wrote: > The fix shrinks the stack using obstack_blank_fast() with a negative > value as described at the bottom of this page: > https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/libiberty/Extra-Fast-Growing.html > "You can use obstack_blank_fast with a “negative” size argument to > make the current object smaller. Just don’t try to shrink it beyond > zero length—there’s no telling what will happen if you do that. > Earlier versions of obstacks allowed you to use obstack_blank to > shrink objects. This will no longer work." > > A unit test (gdb.cp/printstaticrecursion.exp) was added. No new > regression has been observed in testsuite/gdb.cp/*.exp. As mentioned in my last review, did you have a chance to see look if it was possible to improve the existing test about recursive static fields in gdb.cp/classes.exp, rather than introducing a new one? Thanks, Simon