This is the mail archive of the gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com mailing list for the GDB project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: [RFA]: Fix for do_mixed_source_and_assembly in disasm.c


Jason Molenda wrote:
Hi Jeff,

On Dec 17, 2003, at 1:15 PM, Jeff Johnston wrote:

There are a few bugs in do_mixed_source_and_assembly() when dealing with the ia64.


I hit one of the two bugs you're fixing last week, namely the double call to close off the list/tuple. My first fix looked like yours, but I think a slight reworking of the loop is very desirable here. Right now this loop looks approximately like this:


Set close_list to 1 (the list/tuple will be closed at the end of this loop)


First entry of a new source line number:
Start a "src_and_asm_line" tuple, print the source line.
Start a "line_asm_insn" list where instructions will be emitted.
If we're not at the end of the mle array, and the next mle entry's source line number is not greater than the current source line entry, DON'T close off the list (close_list = 0)


Print the assembly instructions for the current address range.

If close_list is 1, close the tuple/list.


Which is a very convoluted way of writing a loop, and more importantly, this only works correctly for one or two assembly ranges for a single source line. If you have a third, on the 2nd iter the tuple/list are closed and then on the 3rd you close them again.


Instead, this is more clear:


First entry of a new source line number: Start a "src_and_asm_line" tuple, print the source line. Start a "line_asm_insn" list where instructions will be emitted.

Print the assembly instructions for the current address range.

If we're at the end of the mle array or the next entry in the array is a new source line, close off the list and tuple.


I also took the opportunity to combine two conditional statements - I won't push hard for that part of the change, but the rest is a clear improvement IMHO.


We only had this code path executed when we were using a compiler with a bug in it internally, so it's not too easy for me to reproduce/test this. I've tried to combine my patch and yours against the current FSF TOT. What do you think of my suggested additional change? Can you try it on the IA64 test case you have?


Jason



Works fine. I like the revision you made. I don't know if the powers-that-be will review this patch before the New Year.


-- Jeff J.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]