Mirror of the gdb-patches mailing list
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Michael Snyder <msnyder@vmware.com>
To: Hui Zhu <teawater@gmail.com>
Cc: Marc Khouzam <marc.khouzam@ericsson.com>,
	  "gdb-patches@sourceware.org" <gdb-patches@sourceware.org>
Subject: Re: [RFA] Patch to fix reverse-debug recursion function tail bug
Date: Mon, 15 Jun 2009 00:55:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4A359C0C.9090508@vmware.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <daef60380906081918o4ec978e8wf20abe1e1a1a02f0@mail.gmail.com>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3958 bytes --]

Hui Zhu wrote:
> PING

Thanks for the reminder.

I added some comment and changed the order of evaluation a bit,
hoping to reduce the performance impact on normal debugging.
And I ran the testsuites, before and after.

Modified patch is attached -- is this OK with you guys?
Mark, can you confirm that it fixes your original bug?

Thx again,
Michael


> On Mon, May 11, 2009 at 15:07, Hui Zhu<teawater@gmail.com> wrote:
>> PING
>>
>> On Wed, May 6, 2009 at 15:23, Hui Zhu <teawater@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Hi Michael,
>>>
>>> Like the prev patch I send to you, this issue still affect cvs-head
>>> and the patch can fix it.
>>> Please help me review it.
>>>
>>> The attachment is the new patch follow cvs-head.
>>>
>>> 2009-05-06  Hui Zhu  <teawater@gmail.com>
>>>
>>>       * infrun.c (handle_inferior_event): Check frame_id when
>>>       check range in reverse debug mode.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Hui
>>>
>>> On Sat, Mar 21, 2009 at 16:52, Hui Zhu <teawater@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> This patch is for bug report by Marc in
>>>> http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb/2009-03/msg00127.html.
>>>>
>>>> This bug in "handle_inferior_event" deal with recursion function tail
>>>> in reverse debug.
>>>> infrun: infwait_normal_state
>>>> infrun: TARGET_WAITKIND_STOPPED
>>>> infrun: stop_pc = 0x8048457
>>>> infrun: stepping inside range [0x8048457-0x804845a]
>>>> infrun: stop_stepping
>>>> factorial (x=4) at b.cc:5
>>>>
>>>> Inferior already step into another frame. But because this is a
>>>> recursion function call, And 0x8048457 is in
>>>> ecs->event_thread->step_range_start and
>>>> ecs->event_thread->step_range_start.
>>>>
>>>> So gdb run in:
>>>>
>>>> if (stop_pc >= ecs->event_thread->step_range_start
>>>>      && stop_pc < ecs->event_thread->step_range_end)
>>>>    {
>>>>
>>>> This code is in front of:
>>>>  if (!frame_id_eq (get_frame_id (get_current_frame ()),
>>>>                    ecs->event_thread->step_frame_id)
>>>>      && (frame_id_eq (frame_unwind_id (get_current_frame ()),
>>>>                       ecs->event_thread->step_frame_id)
>>>>          || execution_direction == EXEC_REVERSE))
>>>>
>>>> So gdb check range without check frame_id.
>>>>
>>>> So I make a patch to check frame_id when check range in reverse debug mode.
>>>>
>>>> 2008-03-21  Hui Zhu  <teawater@gmail.com>
>>>>
>>>>        * infrun.c (handle_inferior_event): Check frame_id when
>>>>        check range in reverse debug mode.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Actually, there is another thing, when gdb begin reverse-debug, it's range is:
>>>>  8048439:       8b 45 08                mov    0x8(%ebp),%eax
>>>>  804843c:       83 e8 01                sub    $0x1,%eax
>>>>  804843f:       89 04 24                mov    %eax,(%esp)
>>>>  8048442:       e8 dd ff ff ff          call   8048424 <_Z9factoriali>
>>>>  8048447:       0f af 45 08             imul   0x8(%ebp),%eax
>>>>  804844b:       89 45 fc                mov    %eax,-0x4(%ebp)
>>>> Why is changed to infrun: stepping inside range [0x8048457-0x804845a]?
>>>> That is because when inferior step at:
>>>>  8048458:       c3                      ret
>>>> In this address, $ebp is same with high level function and this
>>>> function is factorial too.
>>>> So the gdb can't found inferior step into another frame.  It will run to:
>>>>  ecs->event_thread->step_range_start = stop_pc_sal.pc;
>>>>  ecs->event_thread->step_range_end = stop_pc_sal.end;
>>>>  ecs->event_thread->step_frame_id = get_frame_id (get_current_frame ());
>>>>  ecs->event_thread->current_line = stop_pc_sal.line;
>>>>  ecs->event_thread->current_symtab = stop_pc_sal.symtab;
>>>>
>>>>  if (debug_infrun)
>>>>     fprintf_unfiltered (gdb_stdlog, "infrun: keep going\n");
>>>>  keep_going (ecs);
>>>> }
>>>> So ecs->event_thread->step_range_start and ecs->event_thread->step_range_end.
>>>>
>>>> I don't find that it affect the reverse debug or something.  So I didn't fix it.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Hui
>>>>
> 
> 


[-- Attachment #2: tail.txt --]
[-- Type: text/plain, Size: 1303 bytes --]

2009-06-14  Hui Zhu  <teawater@gmail.com>
	    Michael Snyder  <msnyder@vmware.com>

	* infrun.c (handle_inferior_event): Improve reverse stepping
	through function epilogue.

Index: infrun.c
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvs/src/src/gdb/infrun.c,v
retrieving revision 1.387
diff -u -p -r1.387 infrun.c
--- infrun.c	11 Jun 2009 11:57:46 -0000	1.387
+++ infrun.c	15 Jun 2009 00:45:17 -0000
@@ -3623,9 +3623,17 @@ infrun: not switching back to stepped th
 
      Note that step_range_end is the address of the first instruction
      beyond the step range, and NOT the address of the last instruction
-     within it! */
+     within it!
+
+     Note also that during reverse execution, we may be stepping
+     through a function epilogue and therefore must detect when
+     the current-frame changes in the middle of a line.  */
+
   if (stop_pc >= ecs->event_thread->step_range_start
-      && stop_pc < ecs->event_thread->step_range_end)
+      && stop_pc < ecs->event_thread->step_range_end
+      && (execution_direction != EXEC_REVERSE
+	  || frame_id_eq (get_frame_id (get_current_frame ()),
+			  ecs->event_thread->step_frame_id)))
     {
       if (debug_infrun)
 	fprintf_unfiltered (gdb_stdlog, "infrun: stepping inside range [0x%s-0x%s]\n",

  reply	other threads:[~2009-06-15  0:55 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2009-03-21  9:17 Hui Zhu
2009-05-06  7:24 ` Hui Zhu
2009-05-11  7:07   ` Hui Zhu
2009-06-09  2:18     ` Hui Zhu
2009-06-15  0:55       ` Michael Snyder [this message]
2009-06-15  3:37         ` Hui Zhu
2009-06-15 15:06           ` Marc Khouzam
2009-06-15 18:03             ` Michael Snyder
2009-06-18 23:56               ` Michael Snyder

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=4A359C0C.9090508@vmware.com \
    --to=msnyder@vmware.com \
    --cc=gdb-patches@sourceware.org \
    --cc=marc.khouzam@ericsson.com \
    --cc=teawater@gmail.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