From: "Pierre Muller" <pierre.muller@ics-cnrs.unistra.fr>
To: "'Maciej W. Rozycki'" <macro@codesourcery.com>
Cc: "'GDB Patches'" <gdb-patches@sourceware.org>
Subject: PING [RFC] Fix MIPS frame prologue scan problem
Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2012 16:05:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <005901cdcbef$c4a28560$4de79020$@muller@ics-cnrs.unistra.fr> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <002a01cd5043$a0e9f310$e2bdd930$@muller@ics-cnrs.unistra.fr>
Hi Marciej,
I didn't get any answer on the question I raised
on the bottom of my answer to your comments.
I just summarize here:
1) It's true that my pot might not be ABI complaint, but I saw
several other assembly code that use the same approach (it might
be really old assembler)
2) The current code in mips-tdep.c should either
handle the
add $s8, $sp, LOCALSIZE
in a way similar to what I propose or
otherwise at least complain about non-ABI code, no?
Pierre
> -----Message d'origine-----
> De : gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org [mailto:gdb-patches-
> owner@sourceware.org] De la part de Pierre Muller
> Envoyé : vendredi 22 juin 2012 08:53
> À : 'Maciej W. Rozycki'
> Cc : 'GDB Patches'
> Objet : RE: [RFC] Fix MIPS frame prologue scan problem
>
>
>
> > -----Message d'origine-----
> > De : gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org [mailto:gdb-patches-
> > owner@sourceware.org] De la part de Maciej W. Rozycki
> > Envoyé : vendredi 22 juin 2012 01:12
> > À : Pierre Muller
> > Cc : 'GDB Patches'
> > Objet : Re: [RFC] Fix MIPS frame prologue scan problem
> >
> > Hi Pierre,
> >
> > Sorry about the delay, I've been swamped with stuff recently.
> Thanks for your reply.
>
> > On Wed, 13 Jun 2012, Pierre Muller wrote:
> >
> > > I am trying to extend the Free Pascal compiler to support
> > > MIPS architecture.
> > >
> > > From what I read so far, register $s8 (register number 30) can be
used
> > as
> > > a frame register,
> > > but when I set $s8 to the value of the stack pointer ($sp, register
> number
> > > 29)
> > > I get all my locals and parameter of functions wrong.
> > >
> > > I traced it down to the fact that GDB seems to use a
> > > 'virtual' frame pointer register called $fp,
> > > but which is miscalculated in my case.
> > >
> > > In GCC generated code, $s8 register gets the same value as
> > > $sp register, so that this problem does not show up in that case,
> > > but for me, if I have a prologue that reserves 80 bytes,
> > > I will typically get
> > >
> > > # Reserve 80 bytes for locals and area for called function
parameters
> > > addi $sp,$sp,-80
> > > # Save $ra and $s8 registers, there could be others...
> > > sw $ra,44($sp)
> > > sw $s8,40($sp)
> > > # Set $s8 to function entry value of $sp
> > > addi $s8,$sp,80
> > >
> > > Analysis of first instruction leads to setting of
> > > frame_offset to 80.
> > >
> > > The problem is that when the last instruction
> > > is analyzed by mips32_scan_prologue,
> > > it switches the frame_reg from $sp to $s8,
> > > but does not modify frame_offset value.
> > > This leads to a frame pointer $fp
> > > being computed as $s8 + frame_offset
> > > which is equal to $sp + 2*frame_offset.
> > > Thus all my locals are wrong :(
> > >
> > > Substraction of the constant in the last addi instruction (low_word)
> > > to frame_offset seems to cure my problem.
> >
> > Well, to put it short, you're not supposed to do that if you want to
> > follow the MIPS ABI. The MIPS processor has no hardware stack and the
> > software implementation of the stack has been made such that there is
> > generally no need to arrange for a hard frame pointer (in a register
> > separate from the stack pointer), except where dynamic stack allocation
> > is used (alloca in C terms).
>
> I tried to read several MIPS documents,
> and the message was not that clear to me...
>
> > Therefore the right place to look for how the hard frame pointer has
been
> > specified is the "Dynamic Allocation of Stack Space" section in Chapter
3
> > "Machine Interface" of the MIPS psABI document:
> >
> > "When a function requires dynamically allocated stack space it manifests
a
> > frame pointer on entry to the function. The frame pointer is kept in a
> > callee-saved register so that it is not changed across subsequent
function
> > calls. Dynamic stack allocation requires the following steps.
> >
> > 1. On function entry, the function adjusts the stack pointer by the
size
> > of the static stack frame. The frame pointer is then set to this
> > initial sp value and is used for referencing the static elements
> > within the stack frame, performing the normal function of the stack
> > pointer."
> >
> > So in fact both GCC and GDB are correct, you're not supposed to add a
> > constant to the stack pointer when calculating the value of the frame
> > pointer -- it is supposed to hold the value of the stack pointer *after*
> > the frame has been allocated (in other words any frame offsets are
> > non-negative).
>
> Our current problem is that we don't yet knoow the
> stacksize that we need for the function while we generate
> its code, so that using a frame pointer at previous value of stack pointer
> makes this
> really easier for now.
>
> > You need to adjust your code generated (BTW, note that the
> > convention assumed by the ABI is to use non-trapping arithmetic; I'm
> Is this the difference between
> ADDI and ADDIU?
> I thought it was only a signed/unsigned difference,
> Do that mean that you never generate any exception if you use the U
version?
> I am really new to MIPS assembly...
>
> > assuming that you deliberately want to trap on overflows to detect the
> > stack pointer crossing the user/kernel segment boundary, right?).
> Not really as explained above ...
>
> > NB I suggest that you get real debug information generated as well; it
> > can be stabs if DWARF-2 is too difficult to start with. The heuristic
> > unwinder is really the last-chance attempt made by GDB to find its way
> > around, can only be relied on when applied to conservative code and is
> > best avoided if possible.
>
> But my problem is really that
> GDB found my I do generate stabs debugging information,
> and give parameters and locals
> offsets relative to frame pointer.
>
> But in mips32_scan_prologue,
> the first
> ADDI $s8,$sp,LocalSize
> instruction,
> interpreted it in mips32_scan_prologue function
> but ended up with a wrong position of my
> non-ABI standard frame pointer
> because it changed frame pointer register from sp to s8 register,
> but kept frame_offset value as set by the
> SUBI $sp, $sp, LocalSize
> instruction
> analyzed before.
>
> Thus GDB wrongly ends up with a
> frame pointer located a
> value of $s8 register (as from ADDI instruction analysis)
> + LocalSize (from SUBI instruction)
>
> This means that of
> $sp is say at address addr
> $s8 is at addr +LocalSize
> and the virtual frame pointer
> $fp at $s8 + LocalSize = addr + 2 * LocalSize
>
>
> This means that it would be better to remove
> analysis of the ADDI $s8, $sp, LocalSize
> than to leave the current behavior.
>
> I think that we should either use my proposed patch,
> or completely remove the analysis of this ADDI $s8, $sp, LocalSize...
>
>
> > I hope this helps, good luck with your port!
> >
> > Maciej
>
> Thanks,
>
> Pierre
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-11-26 16:05 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-06-13 12:20 Pierre Muller
2012-06-21 22:17 ` PING " Pierre Muller
2012-06-21 23:12 ` Maciej W. Rozycki
2012-06-22 6:53 ` Pierre Muller
2012-11-26 16:05 ` Pierre Muller [this message]
2012-11-26 21:27 ` PING " Maciej W. Rozycki
2013-02-24 12:55 ` [committed] " Maciej W. Rozycki
2013-02-24 21:52 ` Pierre Muller
2013-02-25 18:15 ` Maciej W. Rozycki
[not found] ` <512a8b93.0956420a.2e81.ffffd74aSMTPIN_ADDED_BROKEN@mx.google.com>
2013-02-27 18:15 ` Pedro Alves
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to='005901cdcbef$c4a28560$4de79020$@muller@ics-cnrs.unistra.fr' \
--to=pierre.muller@ics-cnrs.unistra.fr \
--cc=gdb-patches@sourceware.org \
--cc=macro@codesourcery.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox