From: Pierre Muller <muller@cerbere.u-strasbg.fr>
To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@is.elta.co.il>
Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
Subject: Re: [RFC] Possible bug with i386 watchpoints on several targets.
Date: Mon, 03 Dec 2001 01:33:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4.2.0.58.20011203101333.00acd588@ics.u-strasbg.fr> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1858-Fri30Nov2001214802+0200-eliz@is.elta.co.il>
At 20:48 30/11/2001 , Eli Zaretskii a écrit:
> > Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2001 17:04:58 +0100
> > From: Pierre Muller <muller@cerbere.u-strasbg.fr>
> >
> > use the following command
> > (top-gdb) watch gdb_stdout
> > (top-gdb) r
> > Here you should get a stop due to the setting of gdb_stdout value.
> > (top-gdb) cont
> > you should now reach the debuggee command prompt,
> > simply quit.
> > (gdb) quit
> > and rerun the same executable without any watchpoint modification.
> > (top-gdb) run
> > if the bug that I found on both win32 (without i386_cleanup_deregs call)
> > and on current (a few days old) CVS for linux.
> > You won't get any stop on the second run.
>
>This has nothing to do with i386_cleanup_dregs or, indeed, the x86
>watchpoint support. Type "maintenance show-debug-regs", and you will
>see that the watchpoint does trigger on the second run, but GDB
>ignores it. It ignores the watchpoint because the old and the new
>values compare equal on the second run, so GDB thinks it's a false
>alarm.
No, sorry, but I don't agree here:
I retested with today CVS compiled for i386 linux .
Of course i386_stopped_data_address gets called, but if you
set a breakpoint on the end of this function and add the condition
' cond X ret != 0'
Then you will clearly see that the behavior is wrong:
only on the first run after setting a hardware watchpoint you will get
a non zero return value for this watchpoint.
The reason is that on the second run
i386_linux_drset is not called again on the second run.
And its not called again because in i386_insert_aligned_watchpoint
the macros
I386_DR_LOW_SET_ADDR (i, addr);
I386_DR_LOW_SET_CONTROL (dr_control_mirror);
are only called if the the debug register is used for the first time.
As the i386_cleanup_dregs is never called for linux target,
the internal state of the dr_mirror and dr_ref_count
is wrong on the second start.
dr_mirror[0] still contains the hardware watchpoint address
and dr_ref_count contains one.
Thus the enabling of the hardware watchpoint only
does increment dr_ref_count[0] (line 334)
and no linux specifc functions are called.
This is exactly the same behaviour as
what I got before calling i386_cleanup_dregs
for the cygwin target.
>The reason that hardware watchpoints are only considered to fire when
>the watched value changes is that hardware watchpoints are treated teh
>same as software watchpoints, and software watchpoints obviously
>cannot fire unless the watched value changes.
>
>I think it is fundamentally wrong to treat hardware and software
>watchpoints in a similar way. I think hardware watchpoints should be
>treated like read and access watchpoints, not like software
>watchpoints. If others (mainly Michael Snyder) agree, I will submit a
>patch that will make that change, and will also solve this particular
>problem raised by Pierre.
There may be different solutions to the problem above, but I
think that in any case, we need to reset dr_mirror and dr_ref_count
array at each new start.
I believe that this would be enough to solve all current troubles.
PS: A propos unwanted output of the cygwin target
using debug registers, I find the same sort of unwanted output for the linux target,
probably due to the removal/reinsertion of hardware watchpoints
when loading dynamic libraries.
Pierre Muller
Institut Charles Sadron
6,rue Boussingault
F 67083 STRASBOURG CEDEX (France)
mailto:muller@ics.u-strasbg.fr
Phone : (33)-3-88-41-40-07 Fax : (33)-3-88-41-40-99
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2001-12-03 9:33 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <4.2.0.58.20011121124943.00a4a288@ics.u-strasbg.fr>
[not found] ` <1190-Wed21Nov2001202555+0200-eliz@is.elta.co.il>
2001-11-30 7:18 ` Bug with watchpoints on Linux Pierre Muller
2001-11-21 16:19 ` Pierre Muller
2001-11-21 16:50 ` Eli Zaretskii
2001-11-21 17:07 ` [RFC] Possible bug with i386 watchpoints on several targets Pierre Muller
2001-11-30 8:06 ` Pierre Muller
2001-11-30 11:48 ` Eli Zaretskii
2001-11-23 6:39 ` Eli Zaretskii
2001-12-03 1:33 ` Pierre Muller [this message]
2001-12-03 3:10 ` Eli Zaretskii
2001-12-04 4:09 ` Pierre Muller
2001-12-04 23:50 ` Eli Zaretskii
2001-12-05 1:31 ` Pierre Muller
2001-12-05 3:23 ` Eli Zaretskii
2001-12-05 3:55 ` Pierre Muller
2001-11-30 7:45 ` Bug with watchpoints on Linux Eli Zaretskii
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=4.2.0.58.20011203101333.00acd588@ics.u-strasbg.fr \
--to=muller@cerbere.u-strasbg.fr \
--cc=eliz@is.elta.co.il \
--cc=gdb-patches@sources.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