Backport "Fix assertion failure in copy_type"

Resolves: rhbz#2155439

_gdb.spec.Patch.include

@@ -463,3 +463,11 @@ Patch111: gdb-rhbz1870017-p10-plt-prologue-skipping.patch
 # (Simon Marchi, RHBZ 2086761)
 Patch112: gdb-rhbz2086761-unknown-cfa-rule.patch
 
+# Backport "Fix assertion failure in copy_type"
+# (Tom Tromey, RHBZ2155439)
+Patch113: gdb-rhbz2155439-assert-failure-copy_type.patch
+
+# Backport "[gdb/testsuite] Fix PR20630 regression test in gdb.base/printcmds.exp"
+# (Tom de Vries)
+Patch114: gdb-fix-gdb.base-printcmds-s390x-regressions.patch
+

_gdb.spec.patch.include

@@ -110,3 +110,5 @@
 %patch110 -p1
 %patch111 -p1
 %patch112 -p1
+%patch113 -p1
+%patch114 -p1

_patch_order

@@ -110,3 +110,5 @@ gdb-rhbz2012819-ibmz-update-4of5.patch
 gdb-rhbz2012819-ibmz-update-5of5.patch
 gdb-rhbz1870017-p10-plt-prologue-skipping.patch
 gdb-rhbz2086761-unknown-cfa-rule.patch
+gdb-rhbz2155439-assert-failure-copy_type.patch
+gdb-fix-gdb.base-printcmds-s390x-regressions.patch

gdb-fix-gdb.base-printcmds-s390x-regressions.patch

@@ -0,0 +1,71 @@
+From FEDORA_PATCHES Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
+From: Tom de Vries <tdevries@suse.de>
+Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2022 15:21:33 +0100
+Subject: gdb-fix-gdb.base-printcmds-s390x-regressions.patch
+
+;; Backport "[gdb/testsuite] Fix PR20630 regression test in gdb.base/printcmds.exp"
+;; (Tom de Vries)
+
+On s390x-linux, I run into:
+...
+(gdb) print {unsigned char}{65}^M
+$749 = 0 '\000'^M
+(gdb) FAIL: gdb.base/printcmds.exp: print {unsigned char}{65}
+...
+
+In contrast, on x86_64-linux, we have:
+...
+(gdb) print {unsigned char}{65}^M
+$749 = 65 'A'^M
+(gdb) PASS: gdb.base/printcmds.exp: print {unsigned char}{65}
+...
+
+The first problem here is that the test is supposed to be a regression test
+for PR20630, which can be reproduced (for an unfixed gdb) like this:
+...
+(gdb) p {unsigned char[]}{0x17}
+gdbtypes.c:4641: internal-error: copy_type: \
+  Assertion `TYPE_OBJFILE_OWNED (type)' failed.
+...
+but it's not due to insufficient quoting (note the dropped '[]').
+
+That's easy to fix, but after that we have on s390 (big endian):
+...
+(gdb) print {unsigned char[]}{65}^M
+$749 = ""^M
+...
+and on x86_64 (little endian):
+...
+(gdb) print {unsigned char[]}{65}^M
+$749 = "A"^M
+...
+
+Fix this by using 0xffffffff, such that in both cases we have:
+...
+(gdb) print {unsigned char[]}{0xffffffff}^M
+$749 = "\377\377\377\377"^M
+...
+
+Tested on x86_64-linux and s390x-linux.
+
+diff --git a/gdb/testsuite/gdb.base/printcmds.exp b/gdb/testsuite/gdb.base/printcmds.exp
+--- a/gdb/testsuite/gdb.base/printcmds.exp
++++ b/gdb/testsuite/gdb.base/printcmds.exp
+@@ -717,6 +717,7 @@ proc test_print_string_constants {} {
+ }
+ 
+ proc test_print_array_constants {} {
++    global hex
+ 
+     if [target_info exists gdb,cannot_call_functions] {
+ 	unsupported "this target can not call functions"
+@@ -735,7 +736,8 @@ proc test_print_array_constants {} {
+     gdb_test "print *&{4,5,6}\[1\]"	"Attempt to take address of value not located in memory."
+ 
+     # This used to cause a crash.
+-    gdb_test "print {unsigned char[]}{65}" " = 65 'A'"
++    set val [string_to_regexp {"\377\377\377\377"}]
++    gdb_test "print {unsigned char\[\]}{0xffffffff}" " = $val"
+ }
+ 
+ proc test_print_enums {} {

gdb-rhbz2155439-assert-failure-copy_type.patch

@@ -0,0 +1,73 @@
+From FEDORA_PATCHES Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
+From: Bruno Larsen <blarsen@redhat.com>
+Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2023 15:48:00 +0100
+Subject: gdb-rhbz2155439-assert-failure-copy_type.patch
+
+;; Backport "Fix assertion failure in copy_type"
+;; (Tom Tromey, RHBZ2155439)
+
+PR exp/20630 points out a simple way to cause an assertion failure in
+copy_type -- but this was found in the wild a few times as well.
+
+copy_type only works for objfile-owned types, but there isn't a deep
+reason for this.  This patch fixes the bug by updating copy_type to
+work for any sort of type.
+
+Better would perhaps be to finally implement type GC, but I still
+haven't attempted this.
+
+Bug: https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20630
+
+diff --git a/gdb/gdbtypes.c b/gdb/gdbtypes.c
+--- a/gdb/gdbtypes.c
++++ b/gdb/gdbtypes.c
+@@ -5504,27 +5504,24 @@ copy_type_recursive (struct objfile *objfile,
+ }
+ 
+ /* Make a copy of the given TYPE, except that the pointer & reference
+-   types are not preserved.
+-   
+-   This function assumes that the given type has an associated objfile.
+-   This objfile is used to allocate the new type.  */
++   types are not preserved.  */
+ 
+ struct type *
+ copy_type (const struct type *type)
+ {
+-  struct type *new_type;
+-
+-  gdb_assert (TYPE_OBJFILE_OWNED (type));
+-
+-  new_type = alloc_type_copy (type);
++  struct type *new_type = alloc_type_copy (type);
+   TYPE_INSTANCE_FLAGS (new_type) = TYPE_INSTANCE_FLAGS (type);
+   TYPE_LENGTH (new_type) = TYPE_LENGTH (type);
+   memcpy (TYPE_MAIN_TYPE (new_type), TYPE_MAIN_TYPE (type),
+ 	  sizeof (struct main_type));
+   if (type->main_type->dyn_prop_list != NULL)
+-    new_type->main_type->dyn_prop_list
+-      = copy_dynamic_prop_list (&TYPE_OBJFILE (type) -> objfile_obstack,
+-				type->main_type->dyn_prop_list);
++    {
++      struct obstack *storage = (TYPE_OBJFILE_OWNED (type)
++				 ? &TYPE_OBJFILE (type)->objfile_obstack
++				 : gdbarch_obstack (TYPE_OWNER (type).gdbarch));
++      new_type->main_type->dyn_prop_list
++	= copy_dynamic_prop_list (storage, type->main_type->dyn_prop_list);
++    }
+ 
+   return new_type;
+ }
+diff --git a/gdb/testsuite/gdb.base/printcmds.exp b/gdb/testsuite/gdb.base/printcmds.exp
+--- a/gdb/testsuite/gdb.base/printcmds.exp
++++ b/gdb/testsuite/gdb.base/printcmds.exp
+@@ -733,6 +733,9 @@ proc test_print_array_constants {} {
+     gdb_test_escape_braces "print {{0,1,2},{3,4,5}}"  " = {{0, 1, 2}, {3, 4, 5}}"
+     gdb_test "print {4,5,6}\[2\]"	" = 6"
+     gdb_test "print *&{4,5,6}\[1\]"	"Attempt to take address of value not located in memory."
++
++    # This used to cause a crash.
++    gdb_test "print {unsigned char[]}{65}" " = 65 'A'"
+ }
+ 
+ proc test_print_enums {} {

gdb.spec

@@ -1158,6 +1158,12 @@ fi
 %endif
 
 %changelog
+* Wed Mar 23 2023 Bruno Larsen <blarsen@redhat.com>
+- Bakport "Fix assertion failure in copy_type"
+  (Tom Tromey, RHBZ 2155439)
+- Bakport "[gdb/testsuite] Fix PR20630 regression test in gdb.base/printcmds.exp"
+  (Tom de Vries)
+
 * Tue May 24 2022 Keith Seitz <keiths@redhat.com> - 10.2-10.el9
 - Backport "fix logic of find_comp_unit and set_comp_unit"
   (Simon Marchi, RHBZ 2086761)