Mirror of the gdb-patches mailing list
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jan Kratochvil <jan.kratochvil@redhat.com>
To: gdb-patches@sourceware.org
Subject: Re: [patch] infcall: Remove gdb_assert ($sp underflow)
Date: Sat, 27 Feb 2010 00:46:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100227004634.GA9742@host0.dyn.jankratochvil.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20100226225249.GA15019@caradoc.them.org>

On Fri, 26 Feb 2010 23:52:52 +0100, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 19, 2010 at 11:48:05PM +0100, Jan Kratochvil wrote:
> > Unaware how inconvenient is an intentional crash of the testcase on some
> > embedded/non-MMU systems.
> 
> Maybe limit it at least by nosignals?  It might still blow up uClinux
> testing, I don't know offhand if there are other crashy tests.

OK, used:
	if {![target_info exists gdb,nosignals] && ![istarget "*-*-uclinux*"]} {


> > +foreach spval {0 -1} {
> > +    set old_ldprefix $pf_prefix
> > +    lappend pf_prefix "sp=$spval:"
> > +
> > +    gdb_test {set $old_sp = $sp}
> > +    gdb_test "set \$sp = $spval"
> > +
> > +    gdb_test "call doubleit (1)"
> > +
> > +    gdb_test {set $sp = $old_sp}
> > +    set pf_prefix $old_ldprefix
> > +}
> 
> Because these tests run more than once, please give them unique names.

The tests have been already producing:

PASS: gdb.base/callfuncs.exp: sp=0: set $old_sp = $sp
PASS: gdb.base/callfuncs.exp: sp=0: set $sp = 0
PASS: gdb.base/callfuncs.exp: sp=0: call doubleit (1)
PASS: gdb.base/callfuncs.exp: sp=0: set $sp = $old_sp
PASS: gdb.base/callfuncs.exp: sp=-1: set $old_sp = $sp
PASS: gdb.base/callfuncs.exp: sp=-1: set $sp = -1
PASS: gdb.base/callfuncs.exp: sp=-1: call doubleit (1)
PASS: gdb.base/callfuncs.exp: sp=-1: set $sp = $old_sp

But OK, made now the tests code more obvious:

PASS: gdb.base/callfuncs.exp: set $old_sp = $sp
PASS: gdb.base/callfuncs.exp: set $sp = 0
PASS: gdb.base/callfuncs.exp: sp == 0: call doubleit (1)
PASS: gdb.base/callfuncs.exp: set $sp = -1
PASS: gdb.base/callfuncs.exp: sp == -1: call doubleit (1)
PASS: gdb.base/callfuncs.exp: set $sp = $old_sp


Thanks,
Jan


gdb/
2010-02-27  Jan Kratochvil  <jan.kratochvil@redhat.com>

	* infcall.c (call_function_by_hand): Remove gdb_assert on sp and old_sp.
	New comment.

gdb/testsuite/
2010-02-27  Jan Kratochvil  <jan.kratochvil@redhat.com>

	* gdb.base/callfuncs.exp: New tests for $spval 0 and -1.  Remove return.

--- a/gdb/infcall.c
+++ b/gdb/infcall.c
@@ -518,10 +518,9 @@ call_function_by_hand (struct value *function, int nargs, struct value **args)
 	      /* Stack grows up.  */
 	      sp = gdbarch_frame_align (gdbarch, old_sp + 1);
 	  }
-	gdb_assert ((gdbarch_inner_than (gdbarch, 1, 2)
-		    && sp <= old_sp)
-		    || (gdbarch_inner_than (gdbarch, 2, 1)
-		       && sp >= old_sp));
+	/* SP may have underflown address zero here from OLD_SP.  Memory access
+	   functions will probably fail in such case but that is a target's
+	   problem.  */
       }
     else
       /* FIXME: cagney/2002-09-18: Hey, you loose!
--- a/gdb/testsuite/gdb.base/callfuncs.exp
+++ b/gdb/testsuite/gdb.base/callfuncs.exp
@@ -469,5 +469,17 @@ if {$old_reg_content == $new_reg_content} then {
     fail "nested call dummies preserve register contents"
 }
 
-return 0
+# GDB should not crash by internal error on $sp underflow during the inferior
+# call.  It is OK it will stop on some: Cannot access memory at address 0x$hex.
 
+if {![target_info exists gdb,nosignals] && ![istarget "*-*-uclinux*"]} {
+    gdb_test {set $old_sp = $sp}
+
+    gdb_test {set $sp = 0}
+    gdb_test {sp == 0: call doubleit (1)}
+
+    gdb_test {set $sp = -1}
+    gdb_test {sp == -1: call doubleit (1)}
+
+    gdb_test {set $sp = $old_sp}
+}


  reply	other threads:[~2010-02-27  0:46 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2010-02-19 22:48 [patch] infcall: Remove gdb_assert ($sp overflow) Jan Kratochvil
2010-02-26 22:45 ` Tom Tromey
2010-02-27  1:19   ` [patch] infcall: Remove gdb_assert ($sp underflow) Jan Kratochvil
2010-02-28 10:53   ` [patch] infcall: Remove gdb_assert ($sp overflow) Joel Brobecker
2010-02-26 22:53 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2010-02-27  0:46   ` Jan Kratochvil [this message]
2010-02-28 14:35     ` [patch] infcall: Remove gdb_assert ($sp underflow) Daniel Jacobowitz
2010-02-28 17:58       ` Jan Kratochvil

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=20100227004634.GA9742@host0.dyn.jankratochvil.net \
    --to=jan.kratochvil@redhat.com \
    --cc=gdb-patches@sourceware.org \
    /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