This is the mail archive of the
archer@sourceware.org
mailing list for the Archer project.
Re: Calculating array length
- From: Jan Kratochvil <jan dot kratochvil at redhat dot com>
- To: Joost van der Sluis <joost at cnoc dot nl>
- Cc: archer at sourceware dot org
- Date: Sun, 7 Jun 2009 16:47:45 +0200
- Subject: Re: Calculating array length
- References: <1244370173.22994.14.camel@wsjoost>
On Sun, 07 Jun 2009 12:22:53 +0200, Joost van der Sluis wrote:
> But I also have a lot of questions, I hope this is the right place for
> them.
Yes, VLA support is currently still not integrated with FSF GDB.
> First question is the calculation of the length of an array-type in
> type_length_get(), gdbtypes.c. (I'm using the archer-jankratochvil-sla
> branch to improve the handling of arrays)
>
> The length is calculated as follows: (count-1)*byte_stride+element_size.
>
> Ok, so why 'count-1'? Count is the actual item-count, why substract it
> with one? And why is the element_size added? byte_stride (when defined)
> should replace the element_size?
>
> It doesn't make sense to me, as it should be: 'count*byte_stride'?
It depends which length do you want to calculate. According to what you
describe you want to set the FULL_SPAN parameter of type_length_get to be
true. Then it will really return 'count*byte_stride'.
Still the function uses FULL_SPAN as true only internally. When GDB wants to
know the type length it uses it for transferring data from the debuggee memory
into a local GDB copy (for its printing to the user etc.). For such case we
want a _minimal_ (but still complete) contiguous memory range.
Fortran example:
subroutine sub (p)
integer :: p (2, 1)
print *, p (1, 1)
print *, p (2, 1)
end subroutine sub
program subarray
integer :: a (2, 2)
a (1, 1) = 1
a (1, 2) = 2
a (2, 1) = 3
a (2, 2) = 4
call sub (a (1:2, 2:2))
end
Array `a' in the main program has layout (here the first index is row, second
one is column):
1 2
3 4
X Y (these are uninitialized / nonexisting / unused memory locations after
the end of array)
Subroutine `sub' will print:
2
4
Subroutine `sub' know only about a table with 2 rows and 1 column. To make it
working with the original array `a' memory layout without any copy the
pointers to the array are setup as:
array start: row 1 column 2 (element content `2')
rows, therefore number of elements of p: 2
columns, therefore number of elements of p row: 1
element size of p (one row byte length): sizeof (integer) * 1
element size of p row (one element byte length): sizeof (integer)
byte stride of p (offset to the next row): sizeof (integer) * 2
byte stride of p row: sizeof (integer)
Now if you in `sub' do `print p' GDB has to transfer the `p' memory from
inferior. Currently it will transfer contiguous block with content {2,3,4}.
If we would always use FULL_SPAN true then GDB would transfer in this case
a contiguous memory block with content {2,3,4,X}. But X is after the end of
the array and for very large arrays (thousands of elements or elements of size
in kilobytes) memory for X may no longer be mapped and GDB would fail
retrieving the memory of variable being wished to be printed. (+It would be
also less effective.)
GDB has to transfer only the memory it knows that belongs to a variable.
Regards,
Jan