From: Luis Machado via Gdb-patches <gdb-patches@sourceware.org>
To: <gdb-patches@sourceware.org>
Cc: mark@klomp.org
Subject: [PATCH] [Arm] Fix endianness handling for arm record self tests
Date: Mon, 8 Aug 2022 11:12:03 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20220808101203.168954-1-luis.machado@arm.com> (raw)
The arm record tests handle 16-bit and 32-bit thumb instructions, but the
code is laid out in a way that handles the 32-bit thumb instructions as
two 16-bit parts.
This is fine, but it is prone to host-endianness issues given how the two
16-bit parts are stored and how they are accessed later on. Arm is
little-endian by default, so running this test with a GDB built with
--enable-targets=all and on a big endian host will run into the following:
Running selftest arm-record.
Process record and replay target doesn't support syscall number -2036195
Process record does not support instruction 0x7f70ee1d at address 0x0.
Self test failed: self-test failed at ../../binutils-gdb/gdb/arm-tdep.c:14482
Investigating this a bit further, there seems to be a chance to do a simple
fix through a type template, using uint16_t for 16-bit thumb instructions
and uint32_t for 32-bit thumb instructions.
This patch implements this.
Bug: https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29432
---
gdb/arm-tdep.c | 32 ++++++++++++++++++--------------
1 file changed, 18 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
diff --git a/gdb/arm-tdep.c b/gdb/arm-tdep.c
index cf8b610a381..57b865a0819 100644
--- a/gdb/arm-tdep.c
+++ b/gdb/arm-tdep.c
@@ -14387,14 +14387,18 @@ decode_insn (abstract_memory_reader &reader,
#if GDB_SELF_TEST
namespace selftests {
-/* Provide both 16-bit and 32-bit thumb instructions. */
+/* Provide both 16-bit and 32-bit thumb instructions.
+ For 16-bit Thumb instructions, an array of uint16_t should be used.
+ For 32-bit Thumb instructions, an array of uint32_t should be used. */
+
+template<typename T>
class instruction_reader_thumb : public abstract_memory_reader
{
public:
template<size_t SIZE>
instruction_reader_thumb (enum bfd_endian endian,
- const uint16_t (&insns)[SIZE])
+ const T (&insns)[SIZE])
: m_endian (endian), m_insns (insns), m_insns_size (SIZE)
{}
@@ -14404,18 +14408,14 @@ class instruction_reader_thumb : public abstract_memory_reader
SELF_CHECK (memaddr % 2 == 0);
SELF_CHECK ((memaddr / 2) < m_insns_size);
- store_unsigned_integer (buf, 2, m_endian, m_insns[memaddr / 2]);
- if (len == 4)
- {
- store_unsigned_integer (&buf[2], 2, m_endian,
- m_insns[memaddr / 2 + 1]);
- }
+ store_unsigned_integer (buf, sizeof (T), m_endian, m_insns[memaddr / 2]);
+
return true;
}
private:
enum bfd_endian m_endian;
- const uint16_t *m_insns;
+ const T *m_insns;
size_t m_insns_size;
};
@@ -14436,6 +14436,8 @@ arm_record_test (void)
memset (&arm_record, 0, sizeof (arm_insn_decode_record));
arm_record.gdbarch = gdbarch;
+ /* Use the endian-free representation of the instructions here. The test
+ will handle endianness conversions. */
static const uint16_t insns[] = {
/* db b2 uxtb r3, r3 */
0xb2db,
@@ -14444,7 +14446,7 @@ arm_record_test (void)
};
enum bfd_endian endian = gdbarch_byte_order_for_code (arm_record.gdbarch);
- instruction_reader_thumb reader (endian, insns);
+ instruction_reader_thumb<uint16_t> reader (endian, insns);
int ret = decode_insn (reader, &arm_record, THUMB_RECORD,
THUMB_INSN_SIZE_BYTES);
@@ -14470,13 +14472,15 @@ arm_record_test (void)
memset (&arm_record, 0, sizeof (arm_insn_decode_record));
arm_record.gdbarch = gdbarch;
- static const uint16_t insns[] = {
- /* 1d ee 70 7f mrc 15, 0, r7, cr13, cr0, {3} */
- 0xee1d, 0x7f70,
+ /* Use the endian-free representation of the instruction here. The test
+ will handle endianness conversions. */
+ static const uint32_t insns[] = {
+ /* mrc 15, 0, r7, cr13, cr0, {3} */
+ 0x7f70ee1d,
};
enum bfd_endian endian = gdbarch_byte_order_for_code (arm_record.gdbarch);
- instruction_reader_thumb reader (endian, insns);
+ instruction_reader_thumb<uint32_t> reader (endian, insns);
int ret = decode_insn (reader, &arm_record, THUMB2_RECORD,
THUMB2_INSN_SIZE_BYTES);
--
2.25.1
next reply other threads:[~2022-08-08 10:15 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-08-08 10:12 Luis Machado via Gdb-patches [this message]
2022-08-08 12:30 ` Andrew Burgess via Gdb-patches
2022-08-10 8:47 ` Andrew Burgess via Gdb-patches
2022-08-09 9:43 ` Tom de Vries via Gdb-patches
2022-08-09 9:57 ` Tom de Vries via Gdb-patches
2022-08-15 12:13 ` Luis Machado via Gdb-patches
2022-08-09 11:31 ` Luis Machado via Gdb-patches
2022-08-09 11:48 ` Tom de Vries via Gdb-patches
2022-08-09 12:08 ` Tom de Vries via Gdb-patches
2022-08-09 12:09 ` Luis Machado via Gdb-patches
2022-08-09 12:13 ` Tom de Vries via Gdb-patches
2022-08-09 15:24 ` Mark Wielaard
2022-08-15 12:10 ` Luis Machado via Gdb-patches
2022-08-23 20:32 ` [PATCH,v2] " Luis Machado via Gdb-patches
2022-09-01 9:29 ` [PING][PATCH,v2] " Luis Machado via Gdb-patches
2022-09-06 10:39 ` Tom de Vries via Gdb-patches
2022-09-07 8:19 ` Luis Machado via Gdb-patches
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=20220808101203.168954-1-luis.machado@arm.com \
--to=gdb-patches@sourceware.org \
--cc=luis.machado@arm.com \
--cc=mark@klomp.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