public inbox for gdb-patches@sourceware.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Andrew Burgess <aburgess@redhat.com>
To: gdb-patches@sourceware.org
Subject: [PATCH 6/9] gdb: add asserts to gdbarch_register_name
Date: Thu,  1 Sep 2022 22:31:14 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <a688d3942d63b4f5a21f38bbd44852b82f214ce1.1662067442.git.aburgess@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <cover.1662067442.git.aburgess@redhat.com>

This commit adds asserts to gdbarch_register_name that validate the
parameters, and the return value.

The interesting thing here is that gdbarch_register_name is generated
by gdbarch.py, and so, to add these asserts, I need to update the
generation script.

I've added two new arguments for Functions and Methods (as declared in
gdbarch-components.py), these arguments are 'param_checks' and
'result_checks'.  Each of these new arguments can be used to list some
expressions that are then used within gdb_assert calls in the
generated code.

The asserts that validate the API as described in the comment I added
to gdbarch_register_name a few commits back; the register number
passed in needs to be a valid cooked register number, and the result
being returned should not be nullptr.
---
 gdb/gdbarch-components.py | 16 ++++++++++++++++
 gdb/gdbarch.c             |  6 +++++-
 gdb/gdbarch.py            | 19 ++++++++++++++++++-
 3 files changed, 39 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/gdb/gdbarch-components.py b/gdb/gdbarch-components.py
index fcef090c2eb..b8dc1dd36f5 100644
--- a/gdb/gdbarch-components.py
+++ b/gdb/gdbarch-components.py
@@ -99,6 +99,20 @@
 # argument, and NAME is the name.  Note that while the names could be
 # auto-generated, this approach lets the "comment" field refer to
 # arguments in a nicer way.  It is also just nicer for users.
+#
+# * "param_checks" - optional, a list of strings.  Each string is an
+# expression that is placed within a gdb_assert before the call is
+# made to the Function/Method implementation.  Each expression is
+# something that should be true, and it is expected that the
+# expression will make use of the parameters named in 'params' (though
+# this is not required).
+#
+# * "result_checks" - optional, a list of strings.  Each string is an
+# expression that is placed within a gdb_assert after the call to the
+# Function/Method implementation.  Within each expression the variable
+# 'result' can be used to reference the result of the function/method
+# implementation.  The 'result_checks' can only be used if the 'type'
+# of this Function/Method is not 'void'.
 
 Info(
     type="const struct bfd_arch_info *",
@@ -568,6 +582,8 @@ should never return nullptr.
     type="const char *",
     name="register_name",
     params=[("int", "regnr")],
+    param_checks=["regnr >= 0", "regnr < gdbarch_num_cooked_regs (gdbarch)"],
+    result_checks=["result != nullptr"],
     predefault="0",
     invalid=True,
 )
diff --git a/gdb/gdbarch.c b/gdb/gdbarch.c
index 0edae7f6f0a..81e26362954 100644
--- a/gdb/gdbarch.c
+++ b/gdb/gdbarch.c
@@ -2229,9 +2229,13 @@ gdbarch_register_name (struct gdbarch *gdbarch, int regnr)
 {
   gdb_assert (gdbarch != NULL);
   gdb_assert (gdbarch->register_name != NULL);
+  gdb_assert (regnr >= 0);
+  gdb_assert (regnr < gdbarch_num_cooked_regs (gdbarch));
   if (gdbarch_debug >= 2)
     gdb_printf (gdb_stdlog, "gdbarch_register_name called\n");
-  return gdbarch->register_name (gdbarch, regnr);
+  auto result = gdbarch->register_name (gdbarch, regnr);
+  gdb_assert (result != nullptr);
+  return result;
 }
 
 void
diff --git a/gdb/gdbarch.py b/gdb/gdbarch.py
index 696b3028e6f..699ed4f69d2 100755
--- a/gdb/gdbarch.py
+++ b/gdb/gdbarch.py
@@ -112,6 +112,8 @@ class Function(_Component):
         postdefault=None,
         invalid=None,
         printer=None,
+        param_checks=None,
+        result_checks=None,
     ):
         super().__init__(
             comment=comment,
@@ -124,6 +126,11 @@ class Function(_Component):
             printer=printer,
             params=params,
         )
+        self.param_checks = param_checks
+        self.result_checks = result_checks
+
+        if self.type == "void" and self.result_checks:
+            raise Exception("can't have result checks with a void return type")
 
     def ftype(self):
         "Return the name of the function typedef to use."
@@ -444,6 +451,9 @@ with open("gdbarch.c", "w") as f:
                     f"  /* Do not check predicate: {c.get_predicate()}, allow call.  */",
                     file=f,
                 )
+            if c.param_checks:
+                for rule in c.param_checks:
+                    print(f"  gdb_assert ({rule});", file=f)
             print("  if (gdbarch_debug >= 2)", file=f)
             print(
                 f"""    gdb_printf (gdb_stdlog, "gdbarch_{c.name} called\\n");""",
@@ -451,8 +461,15 @@ with open("gdbarch.c", "w") as f:
             )
             print("  ", file=f, end="")
             if c.type != "void":
-                print("return ", file=f, end="")
+                if c.result_checks:
+                    print("auto result = ", file=f, end="")
+                else:
+                    print("return ", file=f, end="")
             print(f"gdbarch->{c.name} ({c.actuals()});", file=f)
+            if c.type != "void" and c.result_checks:
+                for rule in c.result_checks:
+                    print(f"  gdb_assert ({rule});", file=f)
+                print("  return result;", file=f)
             print("}", file=f)
             print(file=f)
             print("void", file=f)
-- 
2.25.4


  parent reply	other threads:[~2022-09-01 21:31 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2022-09-01 21:31 [PATCH 0/9] Lots of changes to gdbarch_register_name (many architectures) Andrew Burgess
2022-09-01 21:31 ` [PATCH 1/9] gdb/testsuite: rewrite capture_command_output proc Andrew Burgess
2022-09-01 21:31 ` [PATCH 2/9] gdb/riscv: fix failure in gdb.base/completion.exp Andrew Burgess
2022-09-01 21:31 ` [PATCH 3/9] gdb/gdbarch: add a comment to gdbarch_register_name Andrew Burgess
2022-09-01 21:31 ` [PATCH 4/9] gdb: add a gdbarch_register_name self test, and fix some architectures Andrew Burgess
2022-09-01 21:31 ` [PATCH 5/9] gdb: check for duplicate register names in selftest Andrew Burgess
2022-09-01 21:31 ` Andrew Burgess [this message]
2022-09-21 18:04   ` [PATCH 6/9] gdb: add asserts to gdbarch_register_name Tom Tromey
2022-09-01 21:31 ` [PATCH 7/9] gdb/csky: remove nullptr return from csky_pseudo_register_name Andrew Burgess
2022-09-01 21:31 ` [PATCH 8/9] gdb: final cleanup of various gdbarch_register_name methods Andrew Burgess
2022-09-01 21:31 ` [PATCH 9/9] gdb: update now gdbarch_register_name doesn't return nullptr Andrew Burgess
2022-09-21 18:07 ` [PATCH 0/9] Lots of changes to gdbarch_register_name (many architectures) Tom Tromey
2022-10-02 16:28   ` Andrew Burgess

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=a688d3942d63b4f5a21f38bbd44852b82f214ce1.1662067442.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).