From: "Six, Lancelot" <Lancelot.Six@amd.com>
To: Simon Marchi <simon.marchi@polymtl.ca>,
"simark@simark.ca" <simark@simark.ca>
Cc: "lsix@lancelotsix.com" <lsix@lancelotsix.com>,
"gdb-patches@sourceware.org" <gdb-patches@sourceware.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH v4] gdb: add a symbol* argument to get_return_value
Date: Thu, 3 Feb 2022 11:10:15 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <PH0PR12MB5452F9D481C6B69FDF2D689283289@PH0PR12MB5452.namprd12.prod.outlook.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <cef7b867-4474-3499-3684-4de4a07dd7bd@polymtl.ca>
[AMD Official Use Only]
> Hi Lancelot,
>
> Every time I look I keep finding nits, sorry :(
No worry.
> I have the feeling that value_type is redundant with func_symbol, since the return value type initially comes from the symbol. So I think we could remove value_type. In fact, it might have been redundant already, since from `struct value *function`, you should also be able to get the function type. But there may be edge cases I don't know about.
To be honest, I did have a similar impression about the function parameter. Once you have the function symbol, you should be able to get a value containing the function address, so this parameter is probably also redundant. The reason I did not make this change is because the function's address is obtained with a call to:
struct value *function = read_var_value (func_symbol, NULL, frame);
Moving this call within get_return_value might mean we use a different FRAME argument (get_current_frame ()). I do not expect it to change anything, but because I am not 100% sure, I did not change that.
> Do you think this change below (that builds on top of your patch) would work? Tests gdb.*/*finish*.exp pass here.
I'll probably try to remove both the value* and type* arguments and see if I have any regression (unless anyone is aware on some edge cases where this can be problematic).
WDYT?
Thanks,
Lancelot.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-02-03 11:10 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-02-02 18:41 [PATCH v3 0/2] Make GDB respect the DW_CC_nocall attribute Lancelot SIX
2022-02-02 18:41 ` [PATCH v3 1/2] gdb: add a symbol* argument to get_return_value Lancelot SIX
2022-02-02 21:01 ` Simon Marchi
2022-02-02 21:59 ` [PATCH v4] " Lancelot SIX
2022-02-03 1:03 ` Simon Marchi
2022-02-03 11:10 ` Six, Lancelot [this message]
2022-02-03 12:35 ` Simon Marchi
2022-02-03 15:46 ` Lancelot SIX
2022-02-03 18:28 ` [PATCH v5] " Lancelot SIX
2022-02-03 19:26 ` Simon Marchi
2022-02-03 22:34 ` Six, Lancelot
2022-02-02 18:41 ` [PATCH v3 2/2] gdb: Respect the DW_CC_nocall attribute Lancelot SIX
2022-02-08 14:27 ` Simon Marchi
2022-02-15 10:53 ` Lancelot SIX
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=PH0PR12MB5452F9D481C6B69FDF2D689283289@PH0PR12MB5452.namprd12.prod.outlook.com \
--to=lancelot.six@amd.com \
--cc=gdb-patches@sourceware.org \
--cc=lsix@lancelotsix.com \
--cc=simark@simark.ca \
--cc=simon.marchi@polymtl.ca \
/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).