From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 25241 invoked by alias); 25 Jan 2009 19:43:28 -0000 Received: (qmail 25232 invoked by uid 22791); 25 Jan 2009 19:43:27 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.4 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mail.codesourcery.com (HELO mail.codesourcery.com) (65.74.133.4) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Sun, 25 Jan 2009 19:43:21 +0000 Received: (qmail 30190 invoked from network); 25 Jan 2009 19:43:19 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO orlando.local) (pedro@127.0.0.2) by mail.codesourcery.com with ESMTPA; 25 Jan 2009 19:43:19 -0000 From: Pedro Alves To: Daniel Jacobowitz Subject: Re: info frame ADDR internal error Date: Sun, 25 Jan 2009 19:43:00 -0000 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.10 Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org References: <200901251635.30297.pedro@codesourcery.com> <20090125175925.GA7133@caradoc.them.org> In-Reply-To: <20090125175925.GA7133@caradoc.them.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200901251944.32616.pedro@codesourcery.com> X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2009-01/txt/msg00478.txt.bz2 :-( Was going to commit the patch, but then I tried it on x86 (I was on x86-64 before) ... (top-gdb) bt #0 main (argc=1, argv=0xffffd524) at ../../src/gdb/gdb.c:28 (top-gdb) info frame 1 Stack frame at 0x1: eip = 0x0; saved eip 0xf7f26f59 Breakpoint 1, internal_error (file=0x8314a4f "../../src/gdb/valops.c", line=662, string=0x8314a19 "%s: Assertion `%s' failed.") at ../../src/gdb/utils.c:972 972 va_start (ap, string); (top-gdb) bt #0 internal_error (file=0x8314a4f "../../src/gdb/valops.c", line=662, string=0x8314a19 "%s: Assertion `%s' failed.") at ../../src/gdb/utils.c:972 #1 0x08116c44 in value_fetch_lazy (val=0x883f960) at ../../src/gdb/valops.c:662 #2 0x0810b766 in value_contents_all (value=0x883f960) at ../../src/gdb/value.c:375 #3 0x081efd43 in frame_register_unwind (frame=0x8421250, regnum=5, optimizedp=0xffc759f4, lvalp=0xffc759e8, addrp=0xffc759f0, realnump=0xffc759ec, bufferp=0xffc75a40 "...") at ../../src/gdb/frame.c:603 #4 0x081eff19 in frame_unwind_register (frame=0x8421250, regnum=5, buf="...") at ../../src/gdb/frame.c:639 #5 0x081eff3d in get_frame_register (frame=0x84212e4, regnum=5, buf="...") at ../../src/gdb/frame.c:647 #6 0x0809c2b7 in i386_frame_cache (this_frame=0x84212e4, this_cache=0x84212e8) at ../../src/gdb/i386-tdep.c:1306 #7 0x0809c47e in i386_frame_this_id (this_frame=0x84212e4, this_cache=0x84212e8, this_id=0x8421304) at ../../src/gdb/i386-tdep.c:1369 #8 0x081ef2cb in get_frame_id (fi=0x84212e4) at ../../src/gdb/frame.c:261 #9 0x081f194d in get_frame_base (fi=0x84212e4) at ../../src/gdb/frame.c:1666 #10 0x0814cd44 in frame_info (addr_exp=0x83f5133 "1", from_tty=1) at ../../src/gdb/stack.c:995 #11 0x080d51b7 in do_cfunc (c=0x84187c0, args=0x83f5133 "1", from_tty=1) at ../../src/gdb/cli/cli-decode.c:67 Here's the offender: int value_fetch_lazy (struct value *val) { gdb_assert (value_lazy (val)); allocate_value_contents (val); if (VALUE_LVAL (val) == lval_memory) { CORE_ADDR addr = VALUE_ADDRESS (val) + value_offset (val); int length = TYPE_LENGTH (check_typedef (value_enclosing_type (val))); if (length) read_memory (addr, value_contents_all_raw (val), length); } else if (VALUE_LVAL (val) == lval_register) { struct frame_info *frame; int regnum; struct type *type = check_typedef (value_type (val)); struct value *new_val = val, *mark = value_mark (); /* Offsets are not supported here; lazy register values must refer to the entire register. */ gdb_assert (value_offset (val) == 0); while (VALUE_LVAL (new_val) == lval_register && value_lazy (new_val)) { frame = frame_find_by_id (VALUE_FRAME_ID (new_val)); ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ regnum = VALUE_REGNUM (new_val); gdb_assert (frame != NULL); ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ (top-gdb) p VALUE_FRAME_ID (new_val) $1 = {stack_addr = 1, code_addr = 0, special_addr = 0, stack_addr_p = 1, code_addr_p = 1, special_addr_p = 0} The new frame that create_new_frame created, isn't linked in the regular ( current_frame->... ) frame chain, it lives in its own chain, so this frame_find_by_id call isn't going to find it, unless you get lucky. This reinforces the bad things I was saying about create_new_frame. Any suggestions on how this could be fixed? Before we go farther, is this a valid use case at all? Could we rip this piece of parse_frame_specification_1 out instead? It's been broken for years now --- I can reproduce the original internal error on gdb-6.0: >./gdb ./gdb GNU gdb 6.0 Copyright 2003 Free Software Foundation, Inc. ... (top-gdb) b main Breakpoint 3 at 0x8077aa4: file ../../gdb-6.0/gdb/gdb.c, line 30. (top-gdb) r Starting program: /home/pedro/gdb/ancient/build-6.0/gdb/gdb Breakpoint 3, main (argc=1, argv=0xffd15254) at ../../gdb-6.0/gdb/gdb.c:30 30 memset (&args, 0, sizeof args); (top-gdb) info frame 1 Stack frame at 0x1: eip = 0x0; saved eip ../../gdb-6.0/gdb/dwarf2-frame.c:518: internal-error: dwarf2_frame_cache: Assertion `fde != NULL' failed. Note that "info frame ADDR" and "frame ADDR" do look for a frame in the regular chain that matches ADDR, before resorting to hacking up a new one with create_new_frame. -- Pedro Alves