From: Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>
To: Yao Qi <qiyaoltc@gmail.com>, gdb-patches@sourceware.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 7/8] Resume the inferior with signal rather than stepping over
Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2016 12:04:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <56E2B449.7010905@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1457088276-1170-8-git-send-email-yao.qi@linaro.org>
On 03/04/2016 10:44 AM, Yao Qi wrote:
> When GDBserver steps over a breakpoint using software single step, it
> enqueues the signal, single step and deliver the signal in the next
> resume if step over is not needed. In this way, the program won't
> receive the signal if the conditional breakpoint is set a branch to
> self instruction, because the step over is always needed.
>
> This patch removes the restriction that don't deliver the signal to
> the inferior if we are trying to reinsert a breakpoint for software
> single step and change the decision on resume vs. step-over when the
> LWP has pending signals to deliver.
Once the handler returns, it'll retrap the same breakpoint we already stopped
for, and thus I think we'll count a spurious tracepoint/breakpoint hit.
Sounds like we'll need to do like GDB does and remember that we are advancing
past a signal handler, and need to get back to stepping over the breakpoint
if/when the handler returns successfully?
>
> gdb/gdbserver:
>
> 2016-03-04 Yao Qi <yao.qi@linaro.org>
>
> * linux-low.c (LWP_SIGNAL_CAN_BE_DELIVERED): Adjust.
> (need_step_over_p): Return zero if the LWP has pending signals
> can be delivered on software single step target.
> ---
> gdb/gdbserver/linux-low.c | 18 +++++++++++++++---
> 1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/gdb/gdbserver/linux-low.c b/gdb/gdbserver/linux-low.c
> index 2330e67..9bae787 100644
> --- a/gdb/gdbserver/linux-low.c
> +++ b/gdb/gdbserver/linux-low.c
> @@ -4119,12 +4119,10 @@ single_step (struct lwp_info* lwp)
> }
>
> /* The signal can not be delivered to the inferior if we are trying to
> - reinsert a breakpoint for software single step or we're trying to
> finish a fast tracepoint collect. */
>
> #define LWP_SIGNAL_CAN_BE_DELIVERED(LWP) \
> - !(((LWP)->bp_reinsert != 0 && can_software_single_step ()) \
> - || (LWP)->collecting_fast_tracepoint)
> + !((LWP)->collecting_fast_tracepoint)
>
> /* Resume execution of LWP. If STEP is nonzero, single-step it. If
> SIGNAL is nonzero, give it that signal. */
> @@ -4572,6 +4570,20 @@ need_step_over_p (struct inferior_list_entry *entry, void *dummy)
> return 0;
> }
>
> + /* On software single step target, resume the inferior with signal
> + rather than stepping over. */
> + if (can_software_single_step ()
> + && lwp->pending_signals != NULL
> + && LWP_SIGNAL_CAN_BE_DELIVERED (lwp))
> + {
> + if (debug_threads)
> + debug_printf ("Need step over [LWP %ld]? Ignoring, has pending"
> + " signals.\n",
> + lwpid_of (thread));
> +
> + return 0;
I notice this missed restoring the current thread (below).
> + }
> +
> saved_thread = current_thread;
> current_thread = thread;
>
>
--
Thanks,
Pedro Alves
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-03-11 12:04 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 29+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-03-04 10:44 [PATCH 0/8] Step over instruction branches to itself Yao Qi
2016-03-04 10:44 ` [PATCH 6/8] [GDBserver] Don't error in reinsert_raw_breakpoint if bp->inserted Yao Qi
2016-03-04 10:44 ` [PATCH 1/8] Set signal to 0 after enqueue_pending_signal Yao Qi
2016-03-11 10:53 ` Pedro Alves
2016-03-18 14:36 ` Yao Qi
2016-03-04 10:44 ` [PATCH 3/8] Deliver signal in hardware single step Yao Qi
2016-03-11 11:05 ` Pedro Alves
2016-03-11 11:09 ` Pedro Alves
2016-03-11 11:37 ` Pedro Alves
2016-03-16 10:47 ` Yao Qi
2016-03-17 12:12 ` Pedro Alves
2016-03-04 10:44 ` [PATCH 4/8] Force to insert software single step breakpoint Yao Qi
2016-03-11 11:49 ` Pedro Alves
2016-03-16 11:47 ` Yao Qi
2016-03-17 12:40 ` Pedro Alves
2016-03-18 14:25 ` Yao Qi
2016-03-18 15:03 ` Pedro Alves
2016-03-04 10:44 ` [PATCH 2/8] Check LWP_SIGNAL_CAN_BE_DELIVERED for enqueue/dequeue pending signals Yao Qi
2016-03-11 10:55 ` Pedro Alves
2016-03-17 8:40 ` Yao Qi
2016-03-17 11:07 ` Pedro Alves
2016-03-18 14:36 ` Yao Qi
2016-03-16 17:02 ` Luis Machado
2016-03-04 10:44 ` [PATCH 7/8] Resume the inferior with signal rather than stepping over Yao Qi
2016-03-11 12:04 ` Pedro Alves [this message]
2016-03-21 9:40 ` Yao Qi
2016-03-04 10:45 ` [PATCH 8/8] New test case gdb.base/branch-to-self.exp Yao Qi
2016-03-04 10:45 ` [PATCH 5/8] Insert breakpoint even when the raw breakpoint is found Yao Qi
2016-03-11 11:54 ` Pedro Alves
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=56E2B449.7010905@redhat.com \
--to=palves@redhat.com \
--cc=gdb-patches@sourceware.org \
--cc=qiyaoltc@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