memset (0, 0, 0);
Tue Apr 8 07:52:00 GMT 2003
Which xmalloc are you referring to? The xmalloc in this case is a gdb internal function, defined in gdb/utils.c:
PTR xmalloc (size_t size)
return xmmalloc (NULL, size);
And xmmalloc is:
void * xmmalloc (void *md, size_t size)
if (size == 0)
val = NULL;
val = mmalloc (md, size);
if (val == NULL)
So size=0 does indeed return NULL. Also, I have single stepped this code to verify that this is actually what happens.
SuperH (UK) Ltd.
From: Geoff Keating [mailto:email@example.com]
Sent: 07 April 2003 18:18
Cc: firstname.lastname@example.org; email@example.com; firstname.lastname@example.org; McGoogan,Sean
Subject: Re: memset (0, 0, 0);
"Thomas,Stephen" <email@example.com> writes:
> gdb appears to call memset(0,0,0) from build_regcache() in
> gdb/regcache.c. I can't really claim to understand how this works, but
> this function appears to get called 3 times during gdb initialization:
> static void build_regcache (void)
> int sizeof_register_valid;
> sizeof_register_valid = ((NUM_REGS + NUM_PSEUDO_REGS) * sizeof (*register_valid));
> register_valid = xmalloc (sizeof_register_valid);
> memset (register_valid, 0, sizeof_register_valid);
> On the 1st time of calling, none of the gdbarch stuff is set up, so
> NUM_REGS = NUM_PSEUDO_REGS = 0. So xmalloc gets called with size=0.
> That returns 0 as the 'address', which gets passed to memset. I guess
> this just works OK on other architectures (it does on x86 anyway).
> Easy enough to fix I suppose, but is that really the point?
xmalloc is never supposed to return 0, and in fact, there's code to prevent it:
if (size == 0)
size = 1;
newmem = malloc (size);
xmalloc_failed finishes with
so xmalloc should never return NULL.
- Geoffrey Keating <firstname.lastname@example.org>
More information about the Newlib