From: Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@mvista.com>
To: "J. Johnston" <jjohnstn@redhat.com>
Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
Subject: Re: RFC: nptl threading patch for linux
Date: Sat, 10 May 2003 00:58:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20030510005755.GA32695@nevyn.them.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <3EBC3BFA.7030709@redhat.com>
On Fri, May 09, 2003 at 07:38:34PM -0400, J. Johnston wrote:
> Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
> >On Thu, Apr 24, 2003 at 04:52:04PM -0400, J. Johnston wrote:
> >
> >>The following is the last part of my revised nptl patch that has
> >>been broken up per Daniel J.'s suggestion. There are no generated
> >>files included in the patch.
> >
> >
> >Well, this patch doesn't work for me :( Using 2.5.69, since I don't
> >have any of the Red Hat kernels available here at the moment. It looks
> >like GDB bellies up around the second thread creation.
> >
>
> Is this one of the gdb.threads testcases? If not, do any of those run
> for you and/or can you send me a testcase for the problem below so we can
> at least
> have something common to compare?
Sorry, I forgot to say. This is just pthreads.exp, with a breakpoint
on common_routine.
>
> -- Jeff J.
>
> >A backtrace looks like:
> >#0 0xffffe402 in ?? ()
> >#1 0x080e1332 in stop_wait_callback (lp=0x0, data=0xbffff450)
> > at /opt/src/gdb/src-gdblinks/gdb/lin-lwp.c:708
> >#2 0x080e159a in stop_wait_callback (lp=0x0, data=0xbffff450)
> > at /opt/src/gdb/src-gdblinks/gdb/lin-lwp.c:870
> >#3 0x080e159a in stop_wait_callback (lp=0x0, data=0xbffff450)
> > at /opt/src/gdb/src-gdblinks/gdb/lin-lwp.c:870
> >#4 0x080e159a in stop_wait_callback (lp=0x0, data=0xbffff450)
> > at /opt/src/gdb/src-gdblinks/gdb/lin-lwp.c:870
> >
> >And that's not just the stack unwinder getting confused. We really did
> >recurse until we ran out of stack.
> >
> >The superficial reason is this:
> >SWC: Pending event Segmentation Fault (stopped) in LWP 4490
> >
> >i.e. every time we resume it with no signal it SIGSEGV's again, and we
> >never get the SIGSTOP.
> >
> >Here's some more of the log:
> >(gdb) c
> >Continuing.
> >LLR: PTRACE_SINGLESTEP process 4498, 0 (resume event thread)
> >LLW: waitpid 4498 received Trace/breakpoint trap (stopped)
> >LLTA: PTRACE_PEEKUSER LWP 4498, 0, 0 (OK)
> >LLW: Candidate event Trace/breakpoint trap (stopped) in LWP 4498.
> >SEL: Select single-step LWP 4498
> >LLW: trap_ptid is LWP 4498.
> >RC: PTRACE_CONT LWP 4497, 0, 0 (resume sibling)
> >LLR: PTRACE_CONT process 4498, 0 (resume event thread)
> >LLW: waitpid 4497 received Trace/breakpoint trap (stopped)
> >LLTA: PTRACE_PEEKUSER LWP 4497, 0, 0 (OK)
> >LLW: Candidate event Trace/breakpoint trap (stopped) in LWP 4497.
> >SC: kill LWP 4498 **<SIGSTOP>**
> >SC: lwp kill 0 ERRNO-OK
> >SWC: waitpid LWP 4498 received Stopped (signal) (stopped)
> >LLTA: PTRACE_PEEKUSER LWP 4498, 0, 0 (OK)
> >LLW: trap_ptid is LWP 4497.
> >[New Thread 1077276112 (LWP 4499)]
> >LLAL: PTRACE_ATTACH LWP 4499, 0, 0 (OK)
> >LLAL: waitpid LWP 4499 received Stopped (signal) (stopped)
> >LLR: PTRACE_SINGLESTEP process 4497, 0 (resume event thread)
> >LLW: waitpid 4497 received Trace/breakpoint trap (stopped)
> >LLTA: PTRACE_PEEKUSER LWP 4497, 0, 0 (OK)
> >LLW: Candidate event Trace/breakpoint trap (stopped) in LWP 4497.
> >SEL: Select single-step LWP 4497
> >LLW: trap_ptid is LWP 4497.
> >RC: PTRACE_CONT LWP 4499, 0, 0 (resume sibling)
> >RC: PTRACE_CONT LWP 4498, 0, 0 (resume sibling)
> >LLR: PTRACE_CONT process 4497, 0 (resume event thread)
> >LLW: waitpid 4499 received Trace/breakpoint trap (stopped)
> >LLTA: PTRACE_PEEKUSER LWP 4499, 0, 0 (OK)
> >LLW: Candidate event Trace/breakpoint trap (stopped) in LWP 4499.
> >SC: kill LWP 4498 **<SIGSTOP>**
> >SC: lwp kill 0 ERRNO-OK
> >SC: kill LWP 4497 **<SIGSTOP>**
> >SC: lwp kill 0 ERRNO-OK
> >SWC: waitpid LWP 4498 received Stopped (signal) (stopped)
> >LLTA: PTRACE_PEEKUSER LWP 4498, 0, 0 (OK)
> >SWC: waitpid LWP 4497 received Trace/breakpoint trap (stopped)
> >LLTA: PTRACE_PEEKUSER LWP 4497, 0, 0 (OK)
> >PTRACE_CONT LWP 4497, 0, 0 (OK)
> >SWC: Candidate SIGTRAP event in LWP 4497
> >SWC: waitpid LWP 4497 received Trace/breakpoint trap (stopped)
> >LLTA: PTRACE_PEEKUSER LWP 4497, 0, 0 (OK)
> >PTRACE_CONT LWP 4497, 0, 0 (OK)
> >SWC: Candidate SIGTRAP event in LWP 4497
> >SWC: waitpid LWP 4497 received Segmentation fault (stopped)
> >LLTA: PTRACE_PEEKUSER LWP 4497, 0, 0 (OK)
> >SWC: Pending event Segmentation fault (stopped) in LWP 4497
> >SWC: PTRACE_CONT LWP 4497, 0, 0 (OK)
> >SWC: waitpid LWP 4497 received Segmentation fault (stopped)
> >LLTA: PTRACE_PEEKUSER LWP 4497, 0, 0 (OK)
> >
> >
> >A little interpretation: 4497 hits the creation breakpoint. We atach
> >to 4499. 4499 hits the common_routine breakpoint. We stop 4497. It
> >hits the breakpoint at thread creation again for the next thread. We
> >PTRACE_CONT 4497 again trying to get the SIGSTOP, and get another
> >SIGTRAP - probably we were backed up from the breakpoint last time so
> >we hit it again. We try _again_, and SIGSEGV because we're on the
> >second byte of a multi-byte instruction, the first byte having been
> >replaced by a breakpoint.
> >
> >Life explodes.
> >
> >
> >So:
> > - stop_wait_callback should be fixed to not be so dumb when this
> > happens.
> > - we need to figure out how we got into this mess.
> > - and why the SIGSTOP never showed up.
> >
> >I avoid this entire foul issue in gdbserver by not backtracking and
> >resuming the application; instead I just set a flag marking the next
> >SIGSTOP as "expected". It's still not perfect but it's a great deal
> >better. I can do even better when I have some time to play with
> >PTRACE_GETSIGINFO.
> >
> >I'm waiting for GDB to tell me how we got here. The backtrace is more
> >than 40K frames, since I forgot to shrink the stack limit. 50K...
> >170K... ooh!
> >
> >#174697 0x080e1724 in stop_wait_callback (lp=0x0, data=0xbffff450)
> > at /opt/src/gdb/src-gdblinks/gdb/lin-lwp.c:830
> >#174698 0x080e033d in iterate_over_lwps (callback=0x80e12d0
> ><stop_wait_callback>, data=0x1181)
> > at /opt/src/gdb/src-gdblinks/gdb/lin-lwp.c:293
> >#174699 0x080e251e in lin_lwp_wait (ptid={pid = -1, lwp = 0, tid = 0},
> >ourstatus=0x72)
> > at /opt/src/gdb/src-gdblinks/gdb/lin-lwp.c:1499
> >#174700 0x08128ca3 in thread_db_wait (ptid={pid = -1, lwp = 0, tid = 0},
> >ourstatus=0xffffffff)
> > at /opt/src/gdb/src-gdblinks/gdb/thread-db.c:846
> >#174701 0x080bc19e in wait_for_inferior () at
> >/opt/src/gdb/src-gdblinks/gdb/infrun.c:1003
> >#174702 0x080bbf13 in proceed (addr=3221222720, siggnal=144, step=0)
> > at /opt/src/gdb/src-gdblinks/gdb/infrun.c:814
> >#174703 0x080b8fb0 in continue_command (proc_count_exp=0x0, from_tty=1)
> > at /opt/src/gdb/src-gdblinks/gdb/infcmd.c:539
> >
> >It wasn't worth the wait. That didn't help much.
> >
> >
>
>
>
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
MontaVista Software Debian GNU/Linux Developer
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2003-05-10 0:58 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2003-04-24 22:05 J. Johnston
2003-05-09 22:00 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2003-05-09 22:36 ` Andrew Cagney
2003-05-10 0:58 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2003-05-09 23:38 ` J. Johnston
2003-05-10 0:58 ` Daniel Jacobowitz [this message]
2003-05-10 21:18 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2003-05-10 21:59 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2003-05-12 19:36 ` J. Johnston
2003-08-17 20:49 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2003-06-02 18:49 ` Michael Snyder
2003-06-04 20:52 ` J. Johnston
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=20030510005755.GA32695@nevyn.them.org \
--to=drow@mvista.com \
--cc=gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com \
--cc=jjohnstn@redhat.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