From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 107959 invoked by alias); 8 Jan 2020 13:48:19 -0000 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 Received: (qmail 107910 invoked by uid 89); 8 Jan 2020 13:48:15 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-26.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM,GIT_PATCH_0,GIT_PATCH_1,GIT_PATCH_2,GIT_PATCH_3,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 spammy= X-HELO: mail-lj1-f193.google.com Received: from mail-lj1-f193.google.com (HELO mail-lj1-f193.google.com) (209.85.208.193) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Wed, 08 Jan 2020 13:48:14 +0000 Received: by mail-lj1-f193.google.com with SMTP id m26so3330947ljc.13 for ; Wed, 08 Jan 2020 05:48:14 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=in-reply-to:references:to:cc:from:subject:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:content-language:content-transfer-encoding; bh=Eqo+vXekuCzieZ+bLt80K8JO2YYgVABDv+VpqO275P0=; b=W99x+nPRGtiElH0yCXoMI1foaYFmBl1XiY1T7BOa/r+u4LmVz18rXjnmLJhWifmaYO VMVH3pzvw+XxBDSWRqy8HdLIvGMjMtypaQSotq0XEJvGAlk+0Mub0eB3qo8+FafFXAE5 fV61Q51IWVEXr217uSNkJ3FCFTTQTGvT5BdHrgxGYjtftB6Qqq56ZXtorDb6jnZ9kdT8 6aeaJ1+WibDOLqtbKgk0IVelTW05qw+Pnqj12MnDKnnLbE0sI6e4b+4zx1fUe8LVjv1m cHoAUZk63UwFrIRkjbjxWRGDxkwdx21NKFoFzN6QlEhpjKdCHAj02G/He/sreATtA07P etcg== Return-Path: Received: from [10.6.0.3] ([185.213.155.162]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id v26sm1421765lfq.73.2020.01.08.05.48.11 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 08 Jan 2020 05:48:11 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <20200104120749.GA166189@gmail.com> References: <20200104120749.GA166189@gmail.com> To: gdb@sourceware.org Cc: Andrew Burgess , Pedro Alves From: Shahab Vahedi Subject: Re: Getting rid of "Cannot access memory at address ..." Message-ID: Date: Wed, 08 Jan 2020 13:48:00 -0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.3.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2020-01/txt/msg00013.txt.bz2 After talking with Andrew, it seems a possible solution could be using try/catch to catch the usual suspect (a.k.a. MEMORY_ERROR): Please let me know what you think of this change? diff --git a/gdb/tui/tui-disasm.c b/gdb/tui/tui-disasm.c index 98c691f3387..7faaa45f039 100644 --- a/gdb/tui/tui-disasm.c +++ b/gdb/tui/tui-disasm.c @@ -226,7 +226,18 @@ tui_disasm_window::set_contents (struct gdbarch *arch, /* Get temporary table that will hold all strings (addr & insn). */ std::vector asm_lines (max_lines); size_t addr_size = 0; - tui_disassemble (gdbarch, asm_lines, pc, 0, max_lines, &addr_size); + try + { + tui_disassemble (gdbarch, asm_lines, pc, 0, max_lines, &addr_size); + } + catch (const gdb_exception &except) + { + /* In cases where max_lines is asking tui_disassemble() to fetch + too much, like when PC goes past the valid address range, a + MEMORY_ERROR is thrown, but it is alright. */ + if (except.error != MEMORY_ERROR) + throw; + } /* Align instructions to the same column. */ insn_pos = (1 + (addr_size / tab_len)) * tab_len; My only concern is what if we have MEMORY_ERROR exception for reasons other than disassembling PC addresses that just went beyond the valid range. Do such reasons exist in this scenario? -- Shahab