Re: [PATCH v4 5/5] gdb/frame: Add reinflation method for frame_info_ptr

[Tom Tromey <tom@tromey.com>]

>>>>> "Bruno" == Bruno Larsen via Gdb-patches <gdb-patches@sourceware.org> writes:

Bruno> +  /* Cache the frame_id that the pointer will use to reinflate.  */
Bruno> +  void prepare_reinflate ()
Bruno> +  {
Bruno> +    m_cached_id = get_frame_id(*this);

Missing space before the "(".

Bruno> +  /* Use the cached frame_id to reinflate the pointer.  */
Bruno> +  void reinflate ()
Bruno> +  {
Bruno> +    gdb_assert (m_cached_id != null_frame_id);
Bruno> +
Bruno> +    if(m_ptr == nullptr)

Here too.

Bruno> diff --git a/gdb/infcmd.c b/gdb/infcmd.c
Bruno> index d292a0e55bf..bc171d8818a 100644
Bruno> --- a/gdb/infcmd.c
Bruno> +++ b/gdb/infcmd.c
Bruno> @@ -1814,6 +1814,7 @@ finish_command (const char *arg, int from_tty)
Bruno>    frame = get_prev_frame (get_selected_frame (_("No selected frame.")));
Bruno>    if (frame == 0)
Bruno>      error (_("\"finish\" not meaningful in the outermost frame."));
Bruno> +  frame.prepare_reinflate ();
 
Bruno>    clear_proceed_status (0);
 
Bruno> @@ -1872,6 +1873,7 @@ finish_command (const char *arg, int from_tty)
 
Bruno>        print_stack_frame (get_selected_frame (NULL), 1, LOCATION, 0);
Bruno>      }
Bruno> +  frame.reinflate ();
 
I'm curious about this change.  Did you add this to avoid a crash?
I.e., it's a latent bug of some kind?

Bruno>    if (execution_direction == EXEC_REVERSE)
Bruno>      finish_backward (sm);
Bruno> diff --git a/gdb/mi/mi-cmd-stack.c b/gdb/mi/mi-cmd-stack.c
Bruno> index f23559f886c..2c5bd2db96d 100644
Bruno> --- a/gdb/mi/mi-cmd-stack.c
Bruno> +++ b/gdb/mi/mi-cmd-stack.c
Bruno> @@ -39,6 +39,7 @@
Bruno>  #include "inferior.h"
Bruno>  #include "observable.h"
 
Bruno> +
Bruno>  enum what_to_list { locals, arguments, all };

Spurious change.

Tom