This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sourceware.org
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: -var-update @
On Friday 04 April 2008 00:04:03 Nick Roberts wrote:
> Vladimir Prus writes:
> > On Sunday 30 March 2008 07:54:08 Nick Roberts wrote:
> > > > So, we still don't know why the current code does not work? I think
> > > > we still get to figure out, to make sure that whatever bug there is
> > > > does not affect other cases.
> > >
> > > My patch didn't do the right thing (it always marked a floating variable
> > > object as changed) but it's along the right lines. How about this one?
> >
> > This patch seem to go in the right direction. I'm somewhat surprised that
> > evaluating previous expression gets bogus value, as opposed to getting value
> > in the frame where varobj was originally created. Any ideas why is that?
>
> I've not tried to understand _exactly_ what value was being retrieved, but
> basically var->root->exp was obtained once from gdb_parse_exp_1 in
> varobj_create and this has symbol information in var->root->exp->elts[2].
> Previously this would be the symbol information for the variable in the frame
> for which the variable object was created. At the same time var->value was
> being updated relative to the selected frame, which gave an incorrect address
> value in value->address. I guess a variable's numeric value on the stack is
> computed using both the frame address and an address in the symbol table and
> these were inconsistent.
>
> /* Update expression to new frame. */
> tmp_exp = var->root->exp;
> var->root->exp = tmp_var->root->exp;
> tmp_var->root->exp = tmp_exp;
>
> Moving var->root->exp into tmp_var->root->exp just ensures that this memory
> gets freed when tmp_var is deleted:
>
> varobj_delete (tmp_var, NULL, 0);
>
> > Do you think you can write some test to go along this patch?
>
> We need some tests and documentation at some stage before the next release
> but perhaps Bogdan can confirm that this patch works for him first.
Well, if your patch fixes the issue that *you* saw, then it's already an improvement,
and we better get it into the tree as soon as possible.
- Volodya