From: Andrew Burgess <aburgess@redhat.com>
To: gdb-patches@sourceware.org
Cc: Andrew Burgess <aburgess@redhat.com>
Subject: [PATCH 08/10] gdb: have value_as_address call unpack_pointer
Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2023 14:55:25 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <312bba523f1d5701df37f3c7984c1b18fc4b5f9d.1678460067.git.aburgess@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <cover.1678460067.git.aburgess@redhat.com>
While refactoring some other code in gdb/python/* I wanted to merge
two code paths. One path calls value_as_address, while the other
calls unpack_pointer.
I suspect calling value_as_address is the correct choice, but, while
examining the code I noticed that value_as_address calls unpack_long
rather than unpack_pointer.
Under the hood, unpack_pointer does just call unpack_long so there's
no real difference here, but it feels like value_as_address should
call unpack_pointer.
I've updated the code to use unpack_pointer, and changed a related
comment to say that we call unpack_pointer. I've also adjusted the
header comment on value_as_address. The existing header refers to
some code that is now commented out.
Rather than trying to describe the whole algorithm of
value_as_address, which is already well commented within the function,
I've just trimmed the comment on value_as_address to be a brief
summary of what the function does.
There should be no user visible changes after this commit.
---
gdb/value.c | 9 ++++-----
1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
diff --git a/gdb/value.c b/gdb/value.c
index 7b4df338304..d432b29b61b 100644
--- a/gdb/value.c
+++ b/gdb/value.c
@@ -2551,9 +2551,8 @@ value_as_long (struct value *val)
return unpack_long (val->type (), val->contents ().data ());
}
-/* Extract a value as a C pointer. Does not deallocate the value.
- Note that val's type may not actually be a pointer; value_as_long
- handles all the cases. */
+/* Extract a value as a C pointer. Does not deallocate the value. */
+
CORE_ADDR
value_as_address (struct value *val)
{
@@ -2592,7 +2591,7 @@ value_as_address (struct value *val)
to COERCE_ARRAY below actually does all the usual unary
conversions, which includes converting values of type `function'
to `pointer to function'. This is the challenging conversion
- discussed above. Then, `unpack_long' will convert that pointer
+ discussed above. Then, `unpack_pointer' will convert that pointer
back into an address.
So, suppose the user types `disassemble foo' on an architecture
@@ -2653,7 +2652,7 @@ value_as_address (struct value *val)
return gdbarch_integer_to_address (gdbarch, val->type (),
val->contents ().data ());
- return unpack_long (val->type (), val->contents ().data ());
+ return unpack_pointer (val->type (), val->contents ().data ());
#endif
}
\f
--
2.25.4
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-03-10 14:56 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 37+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-03-10 14:55 [PATCH 00/10] Improvements & Cleanup For Python Unwinder API Andrew Burgess
2023-03-10 14:55 ` [PATCH 01/10] gdb/doc: spring clean the Python unwinders documentation Andrew Burgess
2023-03-10 15:24 ` Eli Zaretskii
2023-03-14 9:27 ` Andrew Burgess
2023-03-14 12:56 ` Eli Zaretskii
2023-03-16 14:30 ` Andrew Burgess
2023-03-10 14:55 ` [PATCH 02/10] gdb/python: make the gdb.unwinder.Unwinder class more robust Andrew Burgess
2023-03-10 15:32 ` Eli Zaretskii
2023-03-14 10:06 ` Andrew Burgess
2023-03-14 12:57 ` Eli Zaretskii
2023-03-31 2:15 ` Simon Marchi
2023-04-03 10:02 ` Andrew Burgess
2023-03-10 14:55 ` [PATCH 03/10] gdb/python: remove unneeded nullptr check in frapy_block Andrew Burgess
2023-03-10 14:55 ` [PATCH 04/10] gdb/python: add PENDING_FRAMEPY_REQUIRE_VALID macro in py-unwind.c Andrew Burgess
2023-03-10 14:55 ` [PATCH 05/10] gdb/python: add some additional methods to gdb.PendingFrame Andrew Burgess
2023-03-10 15:42 ` Eli Zaretskii
2023-03-14 10:18 ` Andrew Burgess
2023-03-14 12:59 ` Eli Zaretskii
2023-03-16 14:28 ` Andrew Burgess
2023-03-16 14:46 ` Eli Zaretskii
2023-03-16 17:26 ` Andrew Burgess
2023-03-16 19:54 ` Eli Zaretskii
2023-03-10 14:55 ` [PATCH 06/10] gdb/python: add __repr__ for PendingFrame and UnwindInfo Andrew Burgess
2023-03-10 14:55 ` [PATCH 07/10] gdb/python: remove Py_TPFLAGS_BASETYPE from gdb.UnwindInfo Andrew Burgess
2023-03-10 14:55 ` Andrew Burgess [this message]
2023-03-10 15:28 ` [PATCH 08/10] gdb: have value_as_address call unpack_pointer Tom Tromey
2023-03-10 22:08 ` Andrew Burgess
2023-03-10 14:55 ` [PATCH 09/10] gdb/python: Allow gdb.UnwindInfo to be created with non gdb.Value args Andrew Burgess
2023-03-10 15:34 ` Tom Tromey
2023-03-10 22:16 ` Andrew Burgess
2023-03-11 14:47 ` Tom Tromey
2023-03-10 15:38 ` Eli Zaretskii
2023-03-10 14:55 ` [PATCH 10/10] gdb/python: Add new gdb.unwinder.FrameId class Andrew Burgess
2023-03-10 15:36 ` Eli Zaretskii
2023-03-14 10:58 ` Andrew Burgess
2023-03-14 13:00 ` Eli Zaretskii
2023-03-29 16:27 ` [PATCH 00/10] Improvements & Cleanup For Python Unwinder API Tom Tromey
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=312bba523f1d5701df37f3c7984c1b18fc4b5f9d.1678460067.git.aburgess@redhat.com \
--to=aburgess@redhat.com \
--cc=gdb-patches@sourceware.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).