* [Bug gdb/15294] list with unlimited listsize broken
2013-03-21 18:06 [Bug gdb/15294] New: list with unlimited listsize broken palves at redhat dot com
@ 2013-03-21 18:22 ` palves at redhat dot com
2013-03-28 11:50 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
` (3 subsequent siblings)
4 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: palves at redhat dot com @ 2013-03-21 18:22 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gdb-prs
http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15294
Pedro Alves <palves at redhat dot com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
AssignedTo|unassigned at sourceware |palves at redhat dot com
|dot org |
--
Configure bugmail: http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread* [Bug gdb/15294] list with unlimited listsize broken
2013-03-21 18:06 [Bug gdb/15294] New: list with unlimited listsize broken palves at redhat dot com
2013-03-21 18:22 ` [Bug gdb/15294] " palves at redhat dot com
@ 2013-03-28 11:50 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
2013-03-28 11:57 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
` (2 subsequent siblings)
4 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2013-03-28 11:50 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gdb-prs
http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15294
--- Comment #1 from cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org <cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org> 2013-03-28 11:50:01 UTC ---
CVSROOT: /cvs/src
Module name: src
Branch: gdb_7_6-branch
Changes by: palves@sourceware.org 2013-03-28 11:50:00
Modified files:
gdb : ChangeLog source.c
gdb/doc : ChangeLog gdb.texinfo
gdb/testsuite : ChangeLog
gdb/testsuite/gdb.base: list.exp
Log message:
Fix PR gdb/15294: list with unlimited listsize broken
Currently, "set listsize -1" is supposed to mean "unlimited" source
lines, but, alas, it doesn't actually work:
(gdb) set listsize -1
(gdb) show listsize
Number of source lines gdb will list by default is unlimited.
(gdb) list 1
(gdb) list 1
(gdb) list 1
(gdb) set listsize 10
(gdb) list 1
1 /* Main function for CLI gdb.
2 Copyright (C) 2002-2013 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
3
4 This file is part of GDB.
5
6 This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or
modify
7 it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as
published by
8 the Free Software Foundation; either version 3 of the License,
or
9 (at your option) any later version.
10
Before this patch:
http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2012-08/msg00367.html
was applied, the "set listsize" command was a var_integer command, and
"unlimited" was set with 0. Internally, var_integer maps 0 to INT_MAX
case var_integer:
{
...
if (val == 0 && c->var_type == var_integer)
val = INT_MAX;
The change in that patch to zuinteger_unlimited command, meant that -1
is left as -1 in the command's control variable (lines_to_list), and
the code in source.c isn't expecting that -- it only expects positive
numbers.
I previously suggested fixing the code and keeping the new behavior,
but I found that "set listsize 0" is currently used in the wild, and
we do have a bunch of other commands where "0" means unlimited, so I'm
thinking that changing this command alone in isolation is not a good
idea.
So I now strongly prefer reverting back the behavior in 7.6 to the
same behavior the command has had since 2006 (0==unlimited, -1=error).
Before that, set listsize -1 would be accepted as unlimited as well.
After 7.6 is out, in mainline, we can get back to reconsidering
changing this command's behavior, if there's a real need for being
able to suppress output. For now, let's play it safe.
The "list line 1 with unlimited listsize" test in list.exp was
originally written years and years ago expecting 0 to mean "no
output", but GDB never actually worked that way, even when the tests
were written, so the tests had been xfailed then. This patch now
adjusts the test to the new behavior, so that the test actually
passes, and the xfail is removed.
gdb/
2013-03-28 Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>
PR gdb/15294
* source.c (_initialize_source): Change back "set listsize" to an
integer command.
gdb/testsuite/
2013-03-28 Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>
PR gdb/15294
* gdb.base/list.exp (set_listsize): Adjust to accept $arg == 0 to
mean unlimited instead of $arg < 0.
(test_listsize): Remove "listsize of 0 suppresses output" test.
Test that "set listsize 0" ends up with an unlimited listsize.
gdb/doc/
2013-03-28 Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>
PR gdb/15294
* gdb.texinfo (List) <set listsize>: Adjust to document that
listsize 0 means no limit, and remove mention of -1.
Patches:
http://sourceware.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/src/gdb/ChangeLog.diff?cvsroot=src&only_with_tag=gdb_7_6-branch&r1=1.15260.2.17&r2=1.15260.2.18
http://sourceware.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/src/gdb/source.c.diff?cvsroot=src&only_with_tag=gdb_7_6-branch&r1=1.153.2.2&r2=1.153.2.3
http://sourceware.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/src/gdb/doc/ChangeLog.diff?cvsroot=src&only_with_tag=gdb_7_6-branch&r1=1.1423&r2=1.1423.2.1
http://sourceware.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/src/gdb/doc/gdb.texinfo.diff?cvsroot=src&only_with_tag=gdb_7_6-branch&r1=1.1060&r2=1.1060.2.1
http://sourceware.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/src/gdb/testsuite/ChangeLog.diff?cvsroot=src&only_with_tag=gdb_7_6-branch&r1=1.3580.2.9&r2=1.3580.2.10
http://sourceware.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/src/gdb/testsuite/gdb.base/list.exp.diff?cvsroot=src&only_with_tag=gdb_7_6-branch&r1=1.34.2.3&r2=1.34.2.4
--
Configure bugmail: http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread* [Bug gdb/15294] list with unlimited listsize broken
2013-03-21 18:06 [Bug gdb/15294] New: list with unlimited listsize broken palves at redhat dot com
2013-03-21 18:22 ` [Bug gdb/15294] " palves at redhat dot com
2013-03-28 11:50 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2013-03-28 11:57 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
2013-03-28 12:02 ` palves at redhat dot com
2013-03-28 16:23 ` palves at redhat dot com
4 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2013-03-28 11:57 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gdb-prs
http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15294
--- Comment #2 from cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org <cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org> 2013-03-28 11:57:48 UTC ---
CVSROOT: /cvs/src
Module name: src
Changes by: palves@sourceware.org 2013-03-28 11:57:47
Modified files:
gdb : ChangeLog source.c
gdb/doc : ChangeLog gdb.texinfo
gdb/testsuite : ChangeLog
gdb/testsuite/gdb.base: list.exp
Log message:
Fix PR gdb/15294: list with unlimited listsize broken
Currently, "set listsize -1" is supposed to mean "unlimited" source
lines, but, alas, it doesn't actually work:
(gdb) set listsize -1
(gdb) show listsize
Number of source lines gdb will list by default is unlimited.
(gdb) list 1
(gdb) list 1
(gdb) list 1
(gdb) set listsize 10
(gdb) list 1
1 /* Main function for CLI gdb.
2 Copyright (C) 2002-2013 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
3
4 This file is part of GDB.
5
6 This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or
modify
7 it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as
published by
8 the Free Software Foundation; either version 3 of the License,
or
9 (at your option) any later version.
10
Before this patch:
http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2012-08/msg00367.html
was applied, the "set listsize" command was a var_integer command, and
"unlimited" was set with 0. Internally, var_integer maps 0 to INT_MAX
case var_integer:
{
...
if (val == 0 && c->var_type == var_integer)
val = INT_MAX;
The change in that patch to zuinteger_unlimited command, meant that -1
is left as -1 in the command's control variable (lines_to_list), and
the code in source.c isn't expecting that -- it only expects positive
numbers.
I previously suggested fixing the code and keeping the new behavior,
but I found that "set listsize 0" is currently used in the wild, and
we do have a bunch of other commands where "0" means unlimited, so I'm
thinking that changing this command alone in isolation is not a good
idea.
So I now strongly prefer reverting back the behavior in 7.6 to the
same behavior the command has had since 2006 (0==unlimited, -1=error).
Before that, set listsize -1 would be accepted as unlimited as well.
After 7.6 is out, in mainline, we can get back to reconsidering
changing this command's behavior, if there's a real need for being
able to suppress output. For now, let's play it safe.
The "list line 1 with unlimited listsize" test in list.exp was
originally written years and years ago expecting 0 to mean "no
output", but GDB never actually worked that way, even when the tests
were written, so the tests had been xfailed then. This patch now
adjusts the test to the new behavior, so that the test actually
passes, and the xfail is removed.
gdb/
2013-03-28 Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>
PR gdb/15294
* source.c (_initialize_source): Change back "set listsize" to an
integer command.
gdb/testsuite/
2013-03-28 Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>
PR gdb/15294
* gdb.base/list.exp (set_listsize): Adjust to accept $arg == 0 to
mean unlimited instead of $arg < 0.
(test_listsize): Remove "listsize of 0 suppresses output" test.
Test that "set listsize 0" ends up with an unlimited listsize.
gdb/doc/
2013-03-28 Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>
PR gdb/15294
* gdb.texinfo (List) <set listsize>: Adjust to document that
listsize 0 means no limit, and remove mention of -1.
Patches:
http://sourceware.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/src/gdb/ChangeLog.diff?cvsroot=src&r1=1.15327&r2=1.15328
http://sourceware.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/src/gdb/source.c.diff?cvsroot=src&r1=1.155&r2=1.156
http://sourceware.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/src/gdb/doc/ChangeLog.diff?cvsroot=src&r1=1.1427&r2=1.1428
http://sourceware.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/src/gdb/doc/gdb.texinfo.diff?cvsroot=src&r1=1.1064&r2=1.1065
http://sourceware.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/src/gdb/testsuite/ChangeLog.diff?cvsroot=src&r1=1.3604&r2=1.3605
http://sourceware.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/src/gdb/testsuite/gdb.base/list.exp.diff?cvsroot=src&r1=1.38&r2=1.39
--
Configure bugmail: http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread* [Bug gdb/15294] list with unlimited listsize broken
2013-03-21 18:06 [Bug gdb/15294] New: list with unlimited listsize broken palves at redhat dot com
` (2 preceding siblings ...)
2013-03-28 11:57 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2013-03-28 12:02 ` palves at redhat dot com
2013-03-28 16:23 ` palves at redhat dot com
4 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: palves at redhat dot com @ 2013-03-28 12:02 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gdb-prs
http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15294
Pedro Alves <palves at redhat dot com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|ASSIGNED |RESOLVED
Resolution| |FIXED
--- Comment #3 from Pedro Alves <palves at redhat dot com> 2013-03-28 12:02:28 UTC ---
Patch checked in.
--
Configure bugmail: http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread* [Bug gdb/15294] list with unlimited listsize broken
2013-03-21 18:06 [Bug gdb/15294] New: list with unlimited listsize broken palves at redhat dot com
` (3 preceding siblings ...)
2013-03-28 12:02 ` palves at redhat dot com
@ 2013-03-28 16:23 ` palves at redhat dot com
4 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: palves at redhat dot com @ 2013-03-28 16:23 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gdb-prs
http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15294
Pedro Alves <palves at redhat dot com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Target Milestone|--- |7.6
--
Configure bugmail: http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread