[RFA] Remove a cleanup from call_function_by_hand_dummy
Commit Message
This removes a cleanup from call_function_by_hand_dummy, replacing
manual allocation with std::vector.
Regression tested by the buildbot.
gdb/ChangeLog
2018-02-16 Tom Tromey <tom@tromey.com>
* infcall.c (call_function_by_hand_dummy): Use std::vector.
---
gdb/ChangeLog | 4 ++++
gdb/infcall.c | 14 ++++----------
2 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
Comments
On 2018-02-17 11:11, Tom Tromey wrote:
> This removes a cleanup from call_function_by_hand_dummy, replacing
> manual allocation with std::vector.
>
> Regression tested by the buildbot.
>
> gdb/ChangeLog
> 2018-02-16 Tom Tromey <tom@tromey.com>
>
> * infcall.c (call_function_by_hand_dummy): Use std::vector.
> ---
> gdb/ChangeLog | 4 ++++
> gdb/infcall.c | 14 ++++----------
> 2 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/gdb/infcall.c b/gdb/infcall.c
> index 8b75297251..6ff725a815 100644
> --- a/gdb/infcall.c
> +++ b/gdb/infcall.c
> @@ -732,7 +732,6 @@ call_function_by_hand_dummy (struct value
> *function,
> struct type *ftype = check_typedef (value_type (function));
> CORE_ADDR bp_addr;
> struct frame_id dummy_id;
> - struct cleanup *args_cleanup;
> struct frame_info *frame;
> struct gdbarch *gdbarch;
> struct cleanup *terminate_bp_cleanup;
> @@ -1054,21 +1053,18 @@ call_function_by_hand_dummy (struct value
> *function,
> }
> }
>
> + std::vector<struct value *> new_args;
> if (hidden_first_param_p)
> {
> - struct value **new_args;
> -
> /* Add the new argument to the front of the argument list. */
> - new_args = XNEWVEC (struct value *, nargs + 1);
> + new_args.reserve (nargs + 1);
This should probably be resize instead of reserve. When you call
reserve, it doesn't change the actual length of the vector. You could
then use a def_vector to avoid unneeded zero-initialization by the
resize operation.
Other than that, LGTM.
Simon
>>>>> "Simon" == Simon Marchi <simon.marchi@polymtl.ca> writes:
Simon> This should probably be resize instead of reserve. When you call
Simon> reserve, it doesn't change the actual length of the vector. You could
Simon> then use a def_vector to avoid unneeded zero-initialization by the
Simon> resize operation.
I think I get these mixed up 100% of the time :(
What's worse is I read the docs and I guess misunderstood them again.
Maybe I should avoid this entirely by using std::copy or something like
that.
Tom
@@ -732,7 +732,6 @@ call_function_by_hand_dummy (struct value *function,
struct type *ftype = check_typedef (value_type (function));
CORE_ADDR bp_addr;
struct frame_id dummy_id;
- struct cleanup *args_cleanup;
struct frame_info *frame;
struct gdbarch *gdbarch;
struct cleanup *terminate_bp_cleanup;
@@ -1054,21 +1053,18 @@ call_function_by_hand_dummy (struct value *function,
}
}
+ std::vector<struct value *> new_args;
if (hidden_first_param_p)
{
- struct value **new_args;
-
/* Add the new argument to the front of the argument list. */
- new_args = XNEWVEC (struct value *, nargs + 1);
+ new_args.reserve (nargs + 1);
+
new_args[0] = value_from_pointer (lookup_pointer_type (values_type),
struct_addr);
memcpy (&new_args[1], &args[0], sizeof (struct value *) * nargs);
- args = new_args;
+ args = new_args.data ();
nargs++;
- args_cleanup = make_cleanup (xfree, args);
}
- else
- args_cleanup = make_cleanup (null_cleanup, NULL);
/* Create the dummy stack frame. Pass in the call dummy address as,
presumably, the ABI code knows where, in the call dummy, the
@@ -1077,8 +1073,6 @@ call_function_by_hand_dummy (struct value *function,
bp_addr, nargs, args,
sp, struct_return, struct_addr);
- do_cleanups (args_cleanup);
-
/* Set up a frame ID for the dummy frame so we can pass it to
set_momentary_breakpoint. We need to give the breakpoint a frame
ID so that the breakpoint code can correctly re-identify the