* PATCH: allocate namecopy on heap, not stack
@ 2005-04-29 21:38 Jim Blandy
2005-04-29 21:39 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: Jim Blandy @ 2005-04-29 21:38 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gdb-patches
Committed as obvious.
2005-04-28 Jim Blandy <jimb@redhat.com>
* parse.c (namecopy): Change allocation conventions.
(namecopy_size): New variable.
(copy_name): Allocate namecopy using xrealloc, instead of assuming
it has adequate space allocated to it.
(parse_exp_1): Don't try to allocate space for namecopy here.
Index: gdb/parse.c
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvs/cvsfiles/devo/gdb/parse.c,v
retrieving revision 2.105
diff -c -p -r2.105 parse.c
*** gdb/parse.c 13 Apr 2004 16:38:57 -0000 2.105
--- gdb/parse.c 28 Apr 2005 23:58:49 -0000
*************** union type_stack_elt *type_stack;
*** 89,97 ****
int type_stack_depth, type_stack_size;
char *lexptr;
char *prev_lexptr;
- char *namecopy;
int paren_depth;
int comma_terminates;
\f
static int expressiondebug = 0;
--- 89,106 ----
int type_stack_depth, type_stack_size;
char *lexptr;
char *prev_lexptr;
int paren_depth;
int comma_terminates;
+
+ /* A temporary buffer for identifiers, so we can null-terminate them.
+
+ We allocate this with xrealloc. parse_exp_1 used to allocate with
+ alloca, using the size of the whole expression as a conservative
+ estimate of the space needed. However, macro expansion can
+ introduce names longer than the original expression; there's no
+ practical way to know beforehand how large that might be. */
+ char *namecopy;
+ size_t namecopy_size;
\f
static int expressiondebug = 0;
*************** find_template_name_end (char *p)
*** 769,776 ****
--- 778,793 ----
char *
copy_name (struct stoken token)
{
+ /* Make sure there's enough space for the token. */
+ if (namecopy_size < token.length + 1)
+ {
+ namecopy_size = token.length + 1;
+ namecopy = xrealloc (namecopy, token.length + 1);
+ }
+
memcpy (namecopy, token.ptr, token.length);
namecopy[token.length] = 0;
+
return namecopy;
}
\f
*************** parse_exp_1 (char **stringptr, struct bl
*** 1045,1051 ****
else
expression_context_block = get_selected_block (&expression_context_pc);
- namecopy = (char *) alloca (strlen (lexptr) + 1);
expout_size = 10;
expout_ptr = 0;
expout = (struct expression *)
--- 1062,1067 ----
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: PATCH: allocate namecopy on heap, not stack
2005-04-29 21:38 PATCH: allocate namecopy on heap, not stack Jim Blandy
@ 2005-04-29 21:39 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2005-04-29 22:54 ` Jim Blandy
0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: Daniel Jacobowitz @ 2005-04-29 21:39 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jim Blandy; +Cc: gdb-patches
On Fri, Apr 29, 2005 at 04:35:35PM -0500, Jim Blandy wrote:
>
> Committed as obvious.
>
> 2005-04-28 Jim Blandy <jimb@redhat.com>
>
> * parse.c (namecopy): Change allocation conventions.
> (namecopy_size): New variable.
> (copy_name): Allocate namecopy using xrealloc, instead of assuming
> it has adequate space allocated to it.
> (parse_exp_1): Don't try to allocate space for namecopy here.
What prompted ths change? Even "obvious" patches deserve an
explanation.
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery, LLC
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: PATCH: allocate namecopy on heap, not stack
2005-04-29 21:39 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
@ 2005-04-29 22:54 ` Jim Blandy
2005-04-29 23:56 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: Jim Blandy @ 2005-04-29 22:54 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Daniel Jacobowitz; +Cc: gdb-patches
Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@false.org> writes:
> On Fri, Apr 29, 2005 at 04:35:35PM -0500, Jim Blandy wrote:
> >
> > Committed as obvious.
> >
> > 2005-04-28 Jim Blandy <jimb@redhat.com>
> >
> > * parse.c (namecopy): Change allocation conventions.
> > (namecopy_size): New variable.
> > (copy_name): Allocate namecopy using xrealloc, instead of assuming
> > it has adequate space allocated to it.
> > (parse_exp_1): Don't try to allocate space for namecopy here.
>
> What prompted ths change? Even "obvious" patches deserve an
> explanation.
Certainly --- did you see this?
+
+ /* A temporary buffer for identifiers, so we can null-terminate them.
+
+ We allocate this with xrealloc. parse_exp_1 used to allocate with
+ alloca, using the size of the whole expression as a conservative
+ estimate of the space needed. However, macro expansion can
+ introduce names longer than the original expression; there's no
+ practical way to know beforehand how large that might be. */
+ char *namecopy;
+ size_t namecopy_size;
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: PATCH: allocate namecopy on heap, not stack
2005-04-29 22:54 ` Jim Blandy
@ 2005-04-29 23:56 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
0 siblings, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: Daniel Jacobowitz @ 2005-04-29 23:56 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jim Blandy; +Cc: gdb-patches
On Fri, Apr 29, 2005 at 05:52:18PM -0500, Jim Blandy wrote:
> Certainly --- did you see this?
>
> +
> + /* A temporary buffer for identifiers, so we can null-terminate them.
> +
> + We allocate this with xrealloc. parse_exp_1 used to allocate with
> + alloca, using the size of the whole expression as a conservative
> + estimate of the space needed. However, macro expansion can
> + introduce names longer than the original expression; there's no
> + practical way to know beforehand how large that might be. */
> + char *namecopy;
> + size_t namecopy_size;
No, I didn't. Thanks for explaining.
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery, LLC
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2005-04-29 23:56 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2005-04-29 21:38 PATCH: allocate namecopy on heap, not stack Jim Blandy
2005-04-29 21:39 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2005-04-29 22:54 ` Jim Blandy
2005-04-29 23:56 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox