From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 12080 invoked by alias); 15 Oct 2010 17:41:12 -0000 Received: (qmail 12066 invoked by uid 22791); 15 Oct 2010 17:41:10 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.2 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,SPF_HELO_PASS,TW_BJ,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Fri, 15 Oct 2010 17:41:06 +0000 Received: from int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.22]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id o9FHf19X031678 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Fri, 15 Oct 2010 13:41:01 -0400 Received: from ns3.rdu.redhat.com (ns3.rdu.redhat.com [10.11.255.199]) by int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id o9FHf012002316; Fri, 15 Oct 2010 13:41:01 -0400 Received: from opsy.redhat.com (ovpn01.gateway.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.9.1]) by ns3.rdu.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id o9FHf0wI031929; Fri, 15 Oct 2010 13:41:00 -0400 Received: by opsy.redhat.com (Postfix, from userid 500) id AC2C53798AC; Fri, 15 Oct 2010 11:40:59 -0600 (MDT) From: Tom Tromey To: Jan Kratochvil Cc: Doug Evans , gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [patch] fix exp/12117 References: <20101013175308.17B772461AE@ruffy.mtv.corp.google.com> <20101013211008.GA23114@host1.dyn.jankratochvil.net> Date: Fri, 15 Oct 2010 17:41:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: <20101013211008.GA23114@host1.dyn.jankratochvil.net> (Jan Kratochvil's message of "Wed, 13 Oct 2010 23:10:08 +0200") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii 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 X-SW-Source: 2010-10/txt/msg00251.txt.bz2 >>>>> "Jan" == Jan Kratochvil writes: Doug> a) it seems like it's not just c/v, e.g., it's also the address space Doug> [and perhaps here's a case where there are more bugs in this area :-)] Tom> Yeah. Actually, this one seems like it could cause real problems Tom> somewhere. Jan> I may see it too naively but isn't the attached patch OK? I see no Jan> instance flags or objfile ownership problem there. Sorry, all I meant here is that stripping the address space qualifiers in check_typedef is likely to be a source of bugs, because gdb calls check_typedef all over the place, and presumably these bits translate into some important target-specific difference in how memory is accessed. Tom