From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 34356 invoked by alias); 19 May 2015 11:47:04 -0000 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 Received: (qmail 34344 invoked by uid 89); 19 May 2015 11:47:03 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.6 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 X-HELO: mail-pd0-f172.google.com Received: from mail-pd0-f172.google.com (HELO mail-pd0-f172.google.com) (209.85.192.172) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with (AES128-GCM-SHA256 encrypted) ESMTPS; Tue, 19 May 2015 11:47:02 +0000 Received: by pdbqa5 with SMTP id qa5so21682423pdb.0 for ; Tue, 19 May 2015 04:47:00 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 10.66.156.225 with SMTP id wh1mr54291508pab.100.1432036020801; Tue, 19 May 2015 04:47:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from E107787-LIN (gcc1-power7.osuosl.org. [140.211.15.137]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id kh6sm12886815pbc.50.2015.05.19.04.46.58 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Tue, 19 May 2015 04:46:59 -0700 (PDT) From: Yao Qi To: Jan Kratochvil Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [patch] Fix ASAN crash for gdb.compile/compile.exp References: <20150418170138.GA9123@host1.jankratochvil.net> Date: Tue, 19 May 2015 11:47:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: <20150418170138.GA9123@host1.jankratochvil.net> (Jan Kratochvil's message of "Sat, 18 Apr 2015 19:01:38 +0200") Message-ID: <867fs4ssb6.fsf@gmail.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.3 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2015-05/txt/msg00472.txt.bz2 Jan Kratochvil writes: Hi Jan, I didn't follow the compile work in GDB very much, so I may ask something wrong or discussed before. > Whether the objfile really should be already freed during > call_function_by_hand_dummy() I am not sure. Is there any reason we release OBJFILE in the dummy frame dtor? Why don't we register a cleanup to release in OBJFILE in compile_object_run? together with releasing compile_module? 'struct compile_module' has a field objfile, which should be released together with 'struct compile_module' instead of dummy_frame. --=20 Yao (=E9=BD=90=E5=B0=A7)