From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 32169 invoked by alias); 27 Aug 2012 16:39:46 -0000 Received: (qmail 31969 invoked by uid 22791); 27 Aug 2012 16:39:43 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.6 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,KHOP_RCVD_UNTRUST,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_W,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS 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; Mon, 27 Aug 2012 16:39:28 +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 (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id q7RGdRke004249 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Mon, 27 Aug 2012 12:39:27 -0400 Received: from barimba (ovpn01.gateway.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.9.1]) by int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id q7RGdPio031182 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Mon, 27 Aug 2012 12:39:26 -0400 From: Tom Tromey To: Kevin Pouget Cc: gdb@sourceware.org Subject: Re: GDB crashing because of Python References: <87k3wpr9uy.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> <87sjbdo2z4.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> <87wr0kgumi.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> Date: Mon, 27 Aug 2012 16:39:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: <87wr0kgumi.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> (Tom Tromey's message of "Mon, 27 Aug 2012 10:36:05 -0600") Message-ID: <87sjb8gugy.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.1 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2012-08/txt/msg00089.txt.bz2 Tom> While looking at this I think I found even more reference counting bugs. I thought perhaps the weird logic in inferior_to_inferior_object would cause problems. But it turns out that the struct inferior doesn't own a reference, and infpy_dealloc solves the problem I thought I was seeing. Tom