Mirror of the gdb-patches mailing list
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jan Kratochvil <jan.kratochvil@redhat.com>
To: "Metzger, Markus T" <markus.t.metzger@intel.com>
Cc: "gdb-patches@sourceware.org" <gdb-patches@sourceware.org>
Subject: Re: [+rfc] Re: [patch v6 00/21] record-btrace: reverse
Date: Thu, 28 Nov 2013 22:35:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20131128211623.GA16695@host2.jankratochvil.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <A78C989F6D9628469189715575E55B230AA2DBEE@IRSMSX104.ger.corp.intel.com>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1329 bytes --]

On Thu, 28 Nov 2013 09:42:16 +0100, Metzger, Markus T wrote:
> We store the frame_id of the current frame and do a single-step.  
> Then we try to detect stepping into a subroutine by unwinding
> the stack frames and comparing the frame_id's with our stored
> frame_id.

OK, understood now.

In fact the time you change btinfo->replay you also change register contents.
Therefore the registers_changed_ptid() call is there right.

For the frame_id change one could also provide mapping of old frame_id to new
frame_id in frame_id_eq() but that is worse than just re-setting it.


> Do you have a better idea?

I agree in general.  Just:

Rather than get_current_frame_nocheck I find safer to just temporarily switch
off the executing flag.  There are many other checks which make sense which
were omitted.

Calling set_step_info seems needlessly intrusive to me, there is no need to
re-set tp->current_symtab + tp->current_line.  Despite in the moment of
record_btrace_start_replaying() I see step_frame_id should be the current
frame id it does not have to be.  Such as when we reverse-continue, it will be
null_frame_id.

The attached patch(es) is on top of yours.

I still believe inferior should resume + wait if it changes its PC.

I am again not sure if the patch passes without FAILs due to my BTS hardware.


Thanks,
Jan

[-- Attachment #2: 1 --]
[-- Type: text/plain, Size: 2747 bytes --]

diff --git a/gdb/record-btrace.c b/gdb/record-btrace.c
index c50e11b..4a57b51 100644
--- a/gdb/record-btrace.c
+++ b/gdb/record-btrace.c
@@ -1281,9 +1281,8 @@ record_btrace_start_replaying (struct thread_info *tp)
 {
   struct btrace_thread_info *btinfo;
   struct btrace_insn_iterator *replay;
-  const struct btrace_insn *insn;
-  struct symtab_and_line sal;
-  struct frame_info *frame;
+  volatile struct gdb_exception except;
+  int executing;
 
   btinfo = &tp->btrace;
 
@@ -1291,24 +1290,50 @@ record_btrace_start_replaying (struct thread_info *tp)
   if (btinfo->begin == NULL)
     return NULL;
 
-  /* We start replaying at the end of the branch trace.  This corresponds to the
-     current instruction.  */
-  replay = xmalloc (sizeof (*replay));
-  btrace_insn_end (replay, btinfo);
+  executing = is_executing (tp->ptid);
+  TRY_CATCH (except, RETURN_MASK_ALL)
+    {
+      int update_step_frame_id, update_step_stack_frame_id;
+      struct frame_id frame_id;
 
-  /* We're not replaying, yet.  */
-  gdb_assert (btinfo->replay == NULL);
-  btinfo->replay = replay;
+      /* We start replaying at the end of the branch trace.  This corresponds to the
+	 current instruction.  */
+      replay = xmalloc (sizeof (*replay));
+      btrace_insn_end (replay, btinfo);
 
-  /* Make sure we're not using any stale registers.  */
-  registers_changed_ptid (tp->ptid);
+      if (executing)
+	{
+	  /* get_current_frame would error out otherwise.  */
+	  set_executing (tp->ptid, 0);
+	}
+
+      frame_id = get_frame_id (get_current_frame ());
 
-  /* We just started replaying.  The frame id cached for stepping is based
-     on unwinding, not on branch tracing.  Recompute it.  */
-  frame = get_current_frame_nocheck ();
-  insn = btrace_insn_get (replay);
-  sal = find_pc_line (insn->pc, 0);
-  set_step_info (frame, sal);
+      update_step_frame_id = frame_id_eq (frame_id, tp->control.step_frame_id);
+      update_step_stack_frame_id = frame_id_eq (frame_id,
+					       tp->control.step_stack_frame_id);
+
+      /* We're not replaying, yet.  */
+      gdb_assert (btinfo->replay == NULL);
+      btinfo->replay = replay;
+
+      /* Make sure we're not using any stale registers.  */
+      registers_changed_ptid (tp->ptid);
+
+      /* We just started replaying.  The frame id cached for stepping is based
+	 on unwinding, not on branch tracing.  Recompute it.  */
+
+      frame_id = get_frame_id (get_current_frame ());
+
+      if (update_step_frame_id)
+	tp->control.step_frame_id = frame_id;
+      if (update_step_stack_frame_id)
+	tp->control.step_stack_frame_id = frame_id;
+    }
+  if (executing)
+    set_executing (tp->ptid, 1);
+  if (except.reason < 0)
+    throw_exception (except);
 
   return replay;
 }

[-- Attachment #3: 2 --]
[-- Type: text/plain, Size: 2047 bytes --]

diff --git a/gdb/frame.c b/gdb/frame.c
index 5a6f107..0fd98ff 100644
--- a/gdb/frame.c
+++ b/gdb/frame.c
@@ -1367,29 +1367,6 @@ unwind_to_current_frame (struct ui_out *ui_out, void *args)
   return 0;
 }
 
-/* See frame.h.  */
-
-struct frame_info *get_current_frame_nocheck (void)
-{
-  if (current_frame == NULL)
-    {
-      struct frame_info *sentinel_frame =
-	create_sentinel_frame (current_program_space, get_current_regcache ());
-
-      if (catch_exceptions (current_uiout, unwind_to_current_frame,
-			    sentinel_frame, RETURN_MASK_ERROR) != 0)
-	{
-	  /* Oops! Fake a current frame?  Is this useful?  It has a PC
-             of zero, for instance.  */
-	  current_frame = sentinel_frame;
-	}
-    }
-
-  return current_frame;
-}
-
-/* See frame.h.  */
-
 struct frame_info *
 get_current_frame (void)
 {
@@ -1415,7 +1392,19 @@ get_current_frame (void)
 	error (_("Target is executing."));
     }
 
-  return get_current_frame_nocheck ();
+  if (current_frame == NULL)
+    {
+      struct frame_info *sentinel_frame =
+	create_sentinel_frame (current_program_space, get_current_regcache ());
+      if (catch_exceptions (current_uiout, unwind_to_current_frame,
+			    sentinel_frame, RETURN_MASK_ERROR) != 0)
+	{
+	  /* Oops! Fake a current frame?  Is this useful?  It has a PC
+             of zero, for instance.  */
+	  current_frame = sentinel_frame;
+	}
+    }
+  return current_frame;
 }
 
 /* The "selected" stack frame is used by default for local and arg
diff --git a/gdb/frame.h b/gdb/frame.h
index cd2033d..f0da19e 100644
--- a/gdb/frame.h
+++ b/gdb/frame.h
@@ -242,10 +242,6 @@ enum frame_type
    error.  */
 extern struct frame_info *get_current_frame (void);
 
-/* Similar to get_current_frame except that we omit all checks.  May
-   return NULL if unwinding fails.  */
-extern struct frame_info *get_current_frame_nocheck (void);
-
 /* Does the current target interface have enough state to be able to
    query the current inferior for frame info, and is the inferior in a
    state where that is possible?  */

[-- Attachment #4: 3 --]
[-- Type: text/plain, Size: 1619 bytes --]

diff --git a/gdb/record-btrace.c b/gdb/record-btrace.c
index c50e11b..4a57b51 100644
--- a/gdb/record-btrace.c
+++ b/gdb/record-btrace.c
@@ -1662,6 +1687,8 @@ record_btrace_goto_target (struct thread_info *tp,
   struct btrace_insn_iterator *goto_target;
   struct btrace_thread_info *btinfo;
   struct target_waitstatus ws;
+  struct btrace_insn_iterator target_it;
+  volatile struct gdb_exception exception;
 
   btinfo = &tp->btrace;
 
@@ -1686,11 +1713,17 @@ record_btrace_goto_target (struct thread_info *tp,
   btinfo->flags |= BTHR_GOTO;
   btinfo->goto_target = goto_target;
 
-#if 0
+  TRY_CATCH (exception, RETURN_MASK_ALL)
+    {
+
+#if 1
   if (goto_target != NULL)
+    target_it = *goto_target;
+  else
+    btrace_insn_end (&target_it, btinfo);
     tp->control.exception_resume_breakpoint =
       set_momentary_breakpoint_at_pc (target_gdbarch (),
-				      btrace_insn_get (goto_target)->pc,
+				      btrace_insn_get (&target_it)->pc,
 				      bp_until);
 #endif
 #if 0
@@ -1701,8 +1734,18 @@ record_btrace_goto_target (struct thread_info *tp,
   proceed ((CORE_ADDR) -1, GDB_SIGNAL_0, 0);
 #endif
 
-  if (btinfo->goto_target != NULL || (btinfo->flags & BTHR_GOTO) != 0)
+  // It will need a fix if reverse mode supports target-async mode.
+  if ((btinfo->flags & BTHR_GOTO) != 0)
     error (_("Record goto failed."));
+  gdb_assert (btinfo->goto_target == NULL);
+
+    }
+  if (exception.reason < 0)
+    {
+      xfree (btinfo->goto_target);
+      btinfo->goto_target = NULL;
+      btinfo->flags &= ~BTHR_GOTO;
+    }
 }
 
 /* The to_goto_record_begin method of target record-btrace.  */

  reply	other threads:[~2013-11-28 21:16 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 41+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2013-09-20 11:30 Markus Metzger
2013-09-20 11:30 ` [patch v6 15/21] record-btrace: add to_wait and to_resume target methods Markus Metzger
2013-09-20 11:30 ` [patch v6 14/21] record-btrace: provide xfer_partial target method Markus Metzger
2013-09-20 11:30 ` [patch v6 02/21] gdbarch: add instruction predicate methods Markus Metzger
2013-09-20 11:30 ` [patch v6 12/21] frame, backtrace: allow targets to supply a frame unwinder Markus Metzger
2013-09-20 11:30 ` [patch v6 10/21] target: add ops parameter to to_prepare_to_store method Markus Metzger
2013-09-20 11:30 ` [patch v6 16/21] record-btrace: provide target_find_new_threads method Markus Metzger
2013-09-20 11:30 ` [patch v6 06/21] btrace: increase buffer size Markus Metzger
2013-09-20 11:31 ` [patch v6 09/21] btrace: add replay position to btrace thread info Markus Metzger
2013-09-20 11:31 ` [patch v6 17/21] record-btrace: add record goto target methods Markus Metzger
2013-10-06 19:48   ` Jan Kratochvil
2013-09-20 11:31 ` [patch v6 21/21] record-btrace: add (reverse-)stepping support Markus Metzger
2013-10-06 19:52   ` Jan Kratochvil
2013-11-06 15:06     ` Metzger, Markus T
2013-11-26 13:48       ` Jan Kratochvil
2013-09-20 11:31 ` [patch v6 20/21] record-btrace: show trace from enable location Markus Metzger
2013-09-20 11:31 ` [patch v6 11/21] record-btrace: supply register target methods Markus Metzger
2013-09-20 11:31 ` [patch v6 13/21] record-btrace, frame: supply target-specific unwinder Markus Metzger
2013-09-20 11:31 ` [patch v6 05/21] record-btrace: start counting at one Markus Metzger
2013-09-20 11:31 ` [patch v6 19/21] btrace, gdbserver: read branch trace incrementally Markus Metzger
2013-10-06 19:51   ` Jan Kratochvil
2013-09-20 11:31 ` [patch v6 04/21] record-btrace: fix insn range in function call history Markus Metzger
2013-09-20 11:31 ` [patch v6 08/21] record-btrace: make ranges include begin and end Markus Metzger
2013-09-20 11:31 ` [patch v6 07/21] record-btrace: optionally indent function call history Markus Metzger
2013-10-06 19:47   ` Jan Kratochvil
2013-09-20 11:31 ` [patch v6 01/21] btrace, linux: fix memory leak when reading branch trace Markus Metzger
2013-09-20 11:31 ` [patch v6 18/21] record-btrace: extend unwinder Markus Metzger
2013-10-06 19:49   ` Jan Kratochvil
2013-11-06 13:45     ` Metzger, Markus T
2013-11-25 21:11       ` Jan Kratochvil
2013-09-20 11:31 ` [patch v6 03/21] btrace: change branch trace data structure Markus Metzger
2013-10-06 19:46   ` Jan Kratochvil
2013-09-26 19:16 ` v6 crash bugreport [Re: [patch v6 00/21] record-btrace: reverse] Jan Kratochvil
2013-09-27  6:37   ` Metzger, Markus T
2013-10-06 19:59 ` [+rfc] Re: [patch v6 00/21] record-btrace: reverse Jan Kratochvil
2013-11-07 15:44   ` Metzger, Markus T
2013-11-27 20:35     ` Jan Kratochvil
2013-11-28 10:54       ` Metzger, Markus T
2013-11-28 22:35         ` Jan Kratochvil [this message]
2013-11-29 14:27           ` Metzger, Markus T
2013-12-11 19:57             ` 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=20131128211623.GA16695@host2.jankratochvil.net \
    --to=jan.kratochvil@redhat.com \
    --cc=gdb-patches@sourceware.org \
    --cc=markus.t.metzger@intel.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