[PATCH ?] Fix gdb build with gcc-4.8.x
Simon Marchi
simark@simark.ca
Tue Feb 18 20:27:00 GMT 2020
On 2020-02-18 2:06 p.m., Bernd Edlinger wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I noticed that gdb cannot be built any more with gcc-4.8.4
> since Simon's patch which introduced the
> std::unique_ptr<displaced_step_closure>.
>
> The failure mode is as follows:
>
> CXX amd64-tdep.o
> ../../binutils-gdb/gdb/amd64-tdep.c: In function ‘displaced_step_closure_up amd64_displaced_step_copy_insn(gdbarch*, CORE_ADDR, CORE_ADDR, regcache*)’:
> ../../binutils-gdb/gdb/amd64-tdep.c:1514:10: error: cannot bind ‘std::unique_ptr<amd64_displaced_step_closure>’ lvalue to ‘std::unique_ptr<amd64_displaced_step_closure>&&’
> return dsc;
> ^
> In file included from /usr/include/c++/4.8/memory:81:0,
> from ../../binutils-gdb/gdb/../gdbsupport/common-exceptions.h:25,
> from ../../binutils-gdb/gdb/../gdbsupport/common-defs.h:140,
> from ../../binutils-gdb/gdb/defs.h:28,
> from ../../binutils-gdb/gdb/amd64-tdep.c:22:
> /usr/include/c++/4.8/bits/unique_ptr.h:169:2: error: initializing argument 1 of ‘std::unique_ptr<_Tp, _Dp>::unique_ptr(std::unique_ptr<_Up, _Ep>&&) [with _Up = amd64_displaced_step_closure; _Ep = std::default_delete<amd64_displaced_step_closure>; <template-parameter-2-3> = void; _Tp = displaced_step_closure; _Dp = std::default_delete<displaced_step_closure>]’
> unique_ptr(unique_ptr<_Up, _Ep>&& __u) noexcept
> ^
> ../../binutils-gdb/gdb/amd64-tdep.c:1515:1: error: control reaches end of non-void function [-Werror=return-type]
> }
> ^
> cc1plus: all warnings being treated as errors
>
>
> It continues to work with gcc-5.4.0, though. I don't know what
> is with gcc-4.9.x.
>
> I have two possible workarounds for this attached to this as
> variant-1 patch and variant-2 patch respectively. I personally
> would prefer variant-2 which makes displaced_step_closure_up a
> wrapper class around unique_ptr<displaced_step_closure> and
> avoids to trigger this compiler bug by being slightly simpler as
> the original, I think the issue always starts when the argument
> to displaced_step_closure_up (std::unique_ptr<T> &up) is
> using double-ampersand.
>
> So we have three possible ways to deal with this:
> variant-1: simplify the code where the type cast happens,
> variant-2: use a simplified wrapper clase, and
> variant-3: do nothing about it, and document that gcc-5.4.0 is
> or newer is required.
>
> What do you think?
>
>
> Thanks
> Bernd.
>
Hi Bernd,
I don't like variant 2, because it changes the API/contract of
std::unique_ptr. It allows doing
std::unique_ptr<amd64_displaced_step_closure> dsc;
displaced_step_closure_up hello (dsc);
Which would not be possible if displaced_step_closure_up was
a simple typedef. In our code base, the types that end with _up
are known to be typedefs to std::unique_ptr, and I don't think it
would be a good idea to provide such a type with a semantic that
differs from std::unique_ptr.
So I would prefer something along the lines of variant 1, but with
a small comment at each site saying that this is to work around
a problem with g++ 4.8.
Thanks,
Simon
More information about the Gdb-patches
mailing list