From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from simark.ca by simark.ca with LMTP id uA9MB4PV2GkBcBAAWB0awg (envelope-from ) for ; Fri, 10 Apr 2026 06:48:35 -0400 Authentication-Results: simark.ca; dkim=pass (1024-bit key; unprotected) header.d=suse.de header.i=@suse.de header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=susede2_rsa header.b=kbWszL/q; dkim=pass header.d=suse.de header.i=@suse.de header.a=ed25519-sha256 header.s=susede2_ed25519 header.b=mr0SNYAa; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=suse.de header.i=@suse.de header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=susede2_rsa header.b=kbWszL/q; dkim=neutral header.d=suse.de header.i=@suse.de header.a=ed25519-sha256 header.s=susede2_ed25519 header.b=mr0SNYAa; dkim-atps=neutral Received: by simark.ca (Postfix, from userid 112) id 0BC3F1E0BC; Fri, 10 Apr 2026 06:48:35 -0400 (EDT) X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.1 (2024-03-25) on simark.ca X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.4 required=5.0 tests=ARC_SIGNED,ARC_VALID,BAYES_00, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED,RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_CERTIFIED_BLOCKED, RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_RPBL_BLOCKED,RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_SAFE_BLOCKED autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=4.0.1 Received: from vm01.sourceware.org (vm01.sourceware.org [38.145.34.32]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange x25519 server-signature ECDSA (prime256v1) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by simark.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F3AE41E08C for ; Fri, 10 Apr 2026 06:48:33 -0400 (EDT) Received: from vm01.sourceware.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3EF774BA23CE for ; Fri, 10 Apr 2026 10:48:32 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 3EF774BA23CE Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key, unprotected) header.d=suse.de header.i=@suse.de header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=susede2_rsa header.b=kbWszL/q; dkim=pass header.d=suse.de header.i=@suse.de header.a=ed25519-sha256 header.s=susede2_ed25519 header.b=mr0SNYAa; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=suse.de header.i=@suse.de header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=susede2_rsa header.b=kbWszL/q; dkim=neutral header.d=suse.de header.i=@suse.de header.a=ed25519-sha256 header.s=susede2_ed25519 header.b=mr0SNYAa Received: from smtp-out2.suse.de (smtp-out2.suse.de [IPv6:2a07:de40:b251:101:10:150:64:2]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3E14E4BA2E27 for ; Fri, 10 Apr 2026 10:48:06 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 sourceware.org 3E14E4BA2E27 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=suse.de Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=suse.de ARC-Filter: OpenARC Filter v1.0.0 sourceware.org 3E14E4BA2E27 Authentication-Results: server2.sourceware.org; arc=none smtp.remote-ip=2a07:de40:b251:101:10:150:64:2 ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=sourceware.org; s=key; t=1775818086; cv=none; b=xCpZ+qf+9RrZ97EtlsJy4BRF5AoZkYKuaC/iKAr+lylHoFScH7IU8B+0wF3nYR4/mgDz+WVFyvWzSFebvYiamMx6Ch9ZNzXs8Ivd1XMcDr2AqT3PhDWd3ijN3rm0QDTCRFxfqb8oPUZiysrEgXBpfGrcT54WBKxshyqb4rxnngQ= ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=sourceware.org; s=key; t=1775818086; c=relaxed/simple; bh=p+qkEeqxs2+Iv80QnJ/sULvla4VLU4ro1PvDOeogJCY=; h=DKIM-Signature:DKIM-Signature:DKIM-Signature:DKIM-Signature: Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:To:From; b=KkjFHu9DzxZA0TQLVawRdOWczkqQx6vtVUel+PmgNnFmuXnZQSNwgurgejnTr+vnVilLKSXt4DFpwF/BxnpSUKrtuEMID9Eus0NVcGjH5v6iGEA7ILvnY8xRHvXrKRhilW+zq7+6klvkjXUsV4UpsXJ74S0gsGB4EiC91aMey8s= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; server2.sourceware.org DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 3E14E4BA2E27 Received: from imap1.dmz-prg2.suse.org (unknown [10.150.64.97]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by smtp-out2.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CECDB5BD2B; Fri, 10 Apr 2026 10:48:04 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.de; s=susede2_rsa; t=1775818084; h=from:from:reply-to:date:date:message-id:message-id:to:to:cc: mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=lXXewDZJrFxwR4Lcs/o/JtLTJiUddZRZbqChofKPRXY=; b=kbWszL/qeqXxvwraN4jOFjsHlnphHmeoSlQH7wKpNgfZudKwT1e2voqrlS3KcDsX06bqr4 26lRMqkrZvh8eiP1ChtqMgdQWgeel1VCYRfT9qp0rUlK1oU552taMAZWBTKLmWEpW1mzQ7 0Zut6K5jEkohaUD1muIoXdEiRuvhW6c= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.de; s=susede2_ed25519; t=1775818084; h=from:from:reply-to:date:date:message-id:message-id:to:to:cc: mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=lXXewDZJrFxwR4Lcs/o/JtLTJiUddZRZbqChofKPRXY=; b=mr0SNYAa1yn0xg9z6d18b8g//8DvEALLp9znA6dCRrAOC/wWvGfoq7q7vU5cX3sgSrCbWk Ykta/Gun//BPqsBg== Authentication-Results: smtp-out2.suse.de; none DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.de; s=susede2_rsa; t=1775818084; h=from:from:reply-to:date:date:message-id:message-id:to:to:cc: mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=lXXewDZJrFxwR4Lcs/o/JtLTJiUddZRZbqChofKPRXY=; b=kbWszL/qeqXxvwraN4jOFjsHlnphHmeoSlQH7wKpNgfZudKwT1e2voqrlS3KcDsX06bqr4 26lRMqkrZvh8eiP1ChtqMgdQWgeel1VCYRfT9qp0rUlK1oU552taMAZWBTKLmWEpW1mzQ7 0Zut6K5jEkohaUD1muIoXdEiRuvhW6c= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.de; s=susede2_ed25519; t=1775818084; h=from:from:reply-to:date:date:message-id:message-id:to:to:cc: mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=lXXewDZJrFxwR4Lcs/o/JtLTJiUddZRZbqChofKPRXY=; b=mr0SNYAa1yn0xg9z6d18b8g//8DvEALLp9znA6dCRrAOC/wWvGfoq7q7vU5cX3sgSrCbWk Ykta/Gun//BPqsBg== Received: from imap1.dmz-prg2.suse.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by imap1.dmz-prg2.suse.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B985D4A0B2; Fri, 10 Apr 2026 10:48:04 +0000 (UTC) Received: from dovecot-director2.suse.de ([2a07:de40:b281:106:10:150:64:167]) by imap1.dmz-prg2.suse.org with ESMTPSA id hwT9K2TV2GlhDQAAD6G6ig (envelope-from ); Fri, 10 Apr 2026 10:48:04 +0000 Message-ID: <402237db-6554-4819-95a6-411cf506b798@suse.de> Date: Fri, 10 Apr 2026 12:48:04 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] Fix missing print frame when stepping out of function To: Andrew Burgess , gdb-patches@sourceware.org References: <20260331132342.1050954-1-tdevries@suse.de> Content-Language: en-US From: Tom de Vries In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-4.30 / 50.00]; BAYES_HAM(-3.00)[100.00%]; NEURAL_HAM_LONG(-1.00)[-1.000]; NEURAL_HAM_SHORT(-0.20)[-1.000]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; DKIM_SIGNED(0.00)[suse.de:s=susede2_rsa,suse.de:s=susede2_ed25519]; RCPT_COUNT_TWO(0.00)[2]; FUZZY_RATELIMITED(0.00)[rspamd.com]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_ALL(0.00)[]; RCVD_TLS_ALL(0.00)[]; RCVD_VIA_SMTP_AUTH(0.00)[]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[]; TO_DN_SOME(0.00)[]; RCVD_COUNT_TWO(0.00)[2]; MID_RHS_MATCH_FROM(0.00)[]; DBL_BLOCKED_OPENRESOLVER(0.00)[imap1.dmz-prg2.suse.org:helo,suse.de:mid] X-BeenThere: gdb-patches@sourceware.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.30 Precedence: list List-Id: Gdb-patches mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: gdb-patches-bounces~public-inbox=simark.ca@sourceware.org On 4/5/26 12:12 PM, Andrew Burgess wrote: > Hi Tom, > > I looked into the regression you saw with gdb.opt/inline-cmds.exp, and > read your notes. Hi Andrew, a massive thanks for helping out with this. > As you predicted, the issue is that we need to > better take into account the inline frame state when setting up, and > checking during, the step/next process. > > Luckily, we already have a mechanism in GDB to do this, > get_frame_function. This returns the function symbol for a frame, > taking into account which frames are inlined but being skipped. > > Assuming a call stack like: 'non-inline function -> inline function' > the original code was always returning the non-inline function. My > initial proposal was always returning the inline function, and the > reality is neither of these is always correct. > > The get_frame_function returns the function that represents the given > frame, which is exactly what we want. > > In fact, I did consider the idea that we should move away from > tracking via the function symbol, and instead just hold a separate > frame-id for the "original frame when stepping started". Yes, I actually had already started working on that approach when I saw this series. > I think this > would probably work just fine, but currently, if the frame-id changes, > but the function symbol stays the same then GDB would work a > particular way, switching to using a frame-id would change this. I > doubt this is actually a real concern, but I didn't want to change too > much in one go, so I'm sticking with function symbol tracking. I see. > The gdb.opt/inline-cmds.exp regression you ran into was only visible > from part of the test that runs in MI mode, but the bug itself would > manifest in CLI and MI mode, we just didn't spot the bug in CLI mode. > So I extended the test to reveal the bug in CLI mode too. That's a great idea, thanks. > I expect > that the bug likely was present in other tests too, but the test > patterns are too lax, and so didn't trigger for the regression, which > is a bit of a shame, but I don't have the time right now to track down > tests that _should_ have failed and fix them, at least we have one > test that we know checks this stuff now. I didn't think of that, good point. > Your new additions to gdb.dwarf2/dw2-extend-inline-block.exp all pass, > and I've done a full local test run and don't see any other > regressions. > > Your original RFC patch #1 was no longer needed for this series, but > you might want to repost that separately as it did have one use > outside this series, so maybe it's worth having anyway? > OK, I'll do that. > I folded RFC patch #2 into what is the second patch in this series. I > ended up changing the API anyway, so it seemed to make sense to do all > the changes in a single patch. > I ended up reverting that in v4, I think the fix is more readable with infrastructure changes factored out. > Take a look through, and let me know what you think. I think v4 is ok to commit. Thanks, - Tom