From: Andrew Cagney <cagney@gnu.org>
To: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
Subject: [patch/rfc,6.1?] Use right frame ID in step_over_function
Date: Sun, 29 Feb 2004 04:33:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <40416BAF.1020308@gnu.org> (raw)
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 927 bytes --]
Hello,
This goes into the "how did it ever work" category. The idea of
step_over_function is that it:
- finds the caller's resume address
- finds the caller's frame ID
and then sets a breakpoint for that caller instance of the function.
The current code:
- finds the caller's resume address
- finds the _callee_ frame ID
and then uses that to set the breakpoint. Now that is plain weird! It
only works because either:
- the step_frame_id patches up the bug
- the values match as GDB is using the inner-most, rather than
outer-most frame address as part of the frame ID
The bug apepars when trying to step over nested shared library non-debug
info functions (making sense?).
I'll follow this up after 6.1 branch is in place.
Its pretty heavy a change to apply to that branch and this late.
However, like Joel's related patch, I suspect it will be needed :-/
Andrew
PS: Why do I have this feeling of dejavu?
[-- Attachment #2: diffs --]
[-- Type: text/plain, Size: 2150 bytes --]
* infrun.c (step_over_function): When non-legacy code, and no
step_frame_id, use the unwinder to get the caller's frame ID.
Index: infrun.c
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvs/src/src/gdb/infrun.c,v
retrieving revision 1.137
diff -u -r1.137 infrun.c
--- infrun.c 16 Feb 2004 20:49:51 -0000 1.137
+++ infrun.c 29 Feb 2004 04:10:59 -0000
@@ -2930,6 +2930,7 @@
step_over_function (struct execution_control_state *ecs)
{
struct symtab_and_line sr_sal;
+ struct frame_id sr_id;
init_sal (&sr_sal); /* initialize to zeros */
@@ -2973,13 +2974,29 @@
sr_sal.section = find_pc_overlay (sr_sal.pc);
check_for_old_step_resume_breakpoint ();
- step_resume_breakpoint =
- set_momentary_breakpoint (sr_sal, get_frame_id (get_current_frame ()),
- bp_step_resume);
if (frame_id_p (step_frame_id)
&& !IN_SOLIB_DYNSYM_RESOLVE_CODE (sr_sal.pc))
- step_resume_breakpoint->frame_id = step_frame_id;
+ /* NOTE: cagney/2004-02-27: Use the global state's idea of the
+ stepping frame ID. I suspect this is done as it is lighter
+ weight than a call to get_prev_frame. */
+ sr_id = step_frame_id;
+ else if (legacy_frame_p (current_gdbarch))
+ /* NOTE: cagney/2004-02-27: This is the way it was 'cos this is
+ the way it always was. It should be using the unwound (or
+ caller's) ID, and not this (or the callee's) ID. It appeared
+ to work because: legacy architectures used the wrong end of the
+ frame for the ID.stack (inner-most rather than outer-most) so
+ that the callee's id.stack (un adjusted) matched the caller's
+ id.stack giving the "correct" id; more often than not
+ !IN_SOLIB_DYNSYM_RESOLVE_CODE and hence the code above (it was
+ originally later in the function) fixed the ID by using global
+ state. */
+ sr_id = get_frame_id (get_current_frame ());
+ else
+ sr_id = get_frame_id (get_prev_frame (get_current_frame ()));
+
+ step_resume_breakpoint = set_momentary_breakpoint (sr_sal, sr_id, bp_step_resume);
if (breakpoints_inserted)
insert_breakpoints ();
next reply other threads:[~2004-02-29 4:33 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2004-02-29 4:33 Andrew Cagney [this message]
2004-02-29 17:18 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2004-03-19 0:09 ` Andrew Cagney
2004-03-01 1:24 ` Andrew Cagney
2004-03-05 23:02 ` Andrew Cagney
2004-03-05 23:39 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2004-03-06 0:08 ` Andrew Cagney
2004-03-19 0:09 ` Andrew Cagney
2004-03-19 0:09 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2004-03-19 0:09 ` Andrew Cagney
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=40416BAF.1020308@gnu.org \
--to=cagney@gnu.org \
--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