From: Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>
To: Yao Qi <yao@codesourcery.com>
Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Clear upper bits during sign extension
Date: Tue, 30 Dec 2014 12:20:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <54A29886.8030603@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <874msdwl39.fsf@codesourcery.com>
On 12/30/2014 09:19 AM, Yao Qi wrote:
> Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com> writes:
>
>> This seems to me to paper over an issue elsewhere, and is likely
>> to paper over issues as gdb_sign_extend is used more throughout.
>>
>> I'm not immediately familiar with all the conditions indirect_pieced_value
>> is called, but going by the comment quoted, I think the root issue
>> might be that we shouldn't use value_as_address in the first place,
>> but something like unpack_long directly.
>
> indirect_pieced_value is called by value_ind, in which its argument ARG1
> should be regarded as an address, IMO.
>
> #0 indirect_pieced_value (value=0x8af0fd8) at ../../../git/gdb/dwarf2loc.c:2006
> #1 0x081d99fa in value_ind (arg1=0x8af0fd8) at ../../../git/gdb/valops.c:1548
> #2 0x081de7f2 in value_subscript (array=0x8b41678, index=-2) at ../../../git/gdb/valarith.c:181
>
> See value_ind's comment:
>
> /* Given a value of a pointer type, apply the C unary * operator to
> it. */
>
> struct value *
> value_ind (struct value *arg1)
>
>>
>> E.g., I don't see how it makes sense to interpret -2 as an address
>> on spu, which ends up calling:
>
> -2 is *not* the address in this case. The address is 0xfffffffe, and
> sign extended to 64-bit (0xfffffffffffffffe) on MIPS target.
Well, that -2 is being interpreted as an address, given value_as_address is
called on it. From your original post:
>> in the first test, 'd[-2]' is processed by GDB as '* (&d[-2])'. 'd'
>> is a synthetic pointer, so its value is zero, the address of 'd[-2]'
>> is -2. In dwarf2loc.c:indirect_pieced_value,
>>
>> /* This is an offset requested by GDB, such as value subscripts.
>> However, due to how synthetic pointers are implemented, this is
>> always presented to us as a pointer type. This means we have to
>> sign-extend it manually as appropriate. */
>> byte_offset = value_as_address (value); <---- [1]
...
>> on MIPS target, after [1], byte_offset is -2 (0xfffffffffffffffe),
>> because 32-bit -2 (as an address) is sign extended to 64-bit. After
> Sorry, I don't understand how is gdbarch_integer_to_address hook related
> to this problem. The address (0xfffffffe) is the address of synthetic
> pointer, instead of the actual address.
I thought value_as_address was reaching the call to gdbarch_integer_to_address.
But given indirect_pieced_value has this at the top:
if (TYPE_CODE (type) != TYPE_CODE_PTR)
return NULL;
we know we're handling a TYPE_CODE_PTR.
That means that instead, value_as_address is calling unpack_long
at the bottom, which then calls extract_typed_address, which calls
gdbarch_pointer_to_address. The same point applies. The default of
that hook is unsigned_pointer_to_address. But on MIPS, the hook
calls signed_pointer_to_address, which does the sign extension.
That would suggest the fix to be to do something like:
/* This is an offset requested by GDB, such as value subscripts.
However, due to how synthetic pointers are implemented, this is
always presented to us as a pointer type. This means we have to
- sign-extend it manually as appropriate. */
+ sign-extend it if needed (on some architectures, like MIPS,
+ addresses are signed).
byte_offset = value_as_address (value);
- if (TYPE_LENGTH (value_type (value)) < sizeof (LONGEST))
+ if (TYPE_UNSIGNED (value_type (value)
+ && TYPE_LENGTH (value_type (value)) < sizeof (LONGEST))
byte_offset = gdb_sign_extend (byte_offset,
8 * TYPE_LENGTH (value_type (value)));
however, that would not look correct to me on AVR, SPU, or other ports
that install a custom gdbarch_pointer_to_address hook, where value_as_address
ends up returning a CORE_ADDR that had some magic bit manipulations
thrown in. Your change to gdb_sign_extend would wipe those (high) bits
out, for sure, but that clearly is not the intended role of gdb_sign_extend,
so looks brittle and not as direct to rely on that.
So what we need here is to get back the raw value of the pointer
as a signed integer, without any GDB magic address bits.
That is, we don't want the manipulations from gdbarch_pointer_to_address.
So I think we should either explicitly always clear bits above TYPE_LENGTH
after value_as_address, with a comment mentioning that we don't want
any magic bits that gdbarch_pointer_to_address would give us,
or, given we know the value is really an offset, simply extract the value
that way. Like in the patch below:
From 57e268c3f0da5eb90f6c39c307b60c321c76faa2 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>
Date: Tue, 30 Dec 2014 11:07:35 +0000
Subject: [PATCH] always read synthetic pointers as signed integers
---
gdb/dwarf2loc.c | 16 +++++++++++-----
1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
diff --git a/gdb/dwarf2loc.c b/gdb/dwarf2loc.c
index fd5856c..5dd0867 100644
--- a/gdb/dwarf2loc.c
+++ b/gdb/dwarf2loc.c
@@ -2012,6 +2012,7 @@ indirect_pieced_value (struct value *value)
int i, bit_offset, bit_length;
struct dwarf_expr_piece *piece = NULL;
LONGEST byte_offset;
+ enum bfd_endian byte_order;
type = check_typedef (value_type (value));
if (TYPE_CODE (type) != TYPE_CODE_PTR)
@@ -2056,11 +2057,16 @@ indirect_pieced_value (struct value *value)
/* This is an offset requested by GDB, such as value subscripts.
However, due to how synthetic pointers are implemented, this is
always presented to us as a pointer type. This means we have to
- sign-extend it manually as appropriate. */
- byte_offset = value_as_address (value);
- if (TYPE_LENGTH (value_type (value)) < sizeof (LONGEST))
- byte_offset = gdb_sign_extend (byte_offset,
- 8 * TYPE_LENGTH (value_type (value)));
+ sign-extend it manually as appropriate. Use raw
+ extract_signed_integer directly rather than value_as_address and
+ sign extend afterwards on architectures that would need it
+ (mostly everywhere except MIPS, which has signed addresses) as
+ the later would go through gdbarch_pointer_to_address and thus
+ return a CORE_ADDR with high bits set on architectures that
+ encode address spaces and other things in CORE_ADDR. */
+ byte_order = gdbarch_byte_order (get_type_arch (type));
+ byte_offset = extract_signed_integer (value_contents (value),
+ TYPE_LENGTH (type), byte_order);
byte_offset += piece->v.ptr.offset;
gdb_assert (piece);
--
1.9.3
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-12-30 12:20 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-12-29 1:13 Yao Qi
2014-12-29 3:07 ` Joel Brobecker
2014-12-29 3:38 ` Yao Qi
2014-12-29 3:53 ` Joel Brobecker
2014-12-29 5:29 ` Doug Evans
2014-12-29 6:27 ` Yao Qi
2014-12-29 10:48 ` Pedro Alves
2014-12-30 9:20 ` Yao Qi
2014-12-30 12:20 ` Pedro Alves [this message]
2014-12-30 13:47 ` Yao Qi
2015-01-08 5:40 ` Yao Qi
2015-01-08 10:42 ` Pedro Alves
2015-01-08 13:06 ` Yao Qi
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=54A29886.8030603@redhat.com \
--to=palves@redhat.com \
--cc=gdb-patches@sourceware.org \
--cc=yao@codesourcery.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