From: "H.J. Lu" <hjl.tools@gmail.com>
To: Mark Kettenis <mark.kettenis@xs4all.nl>
Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org
Subject: Re: PING: PATCH: PR backtrace/14646: [x32] backtrace doesn't work
Date: Wed, 03 Oct 2012 17:03:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAMe9rOrgAddwBuXZ7_9omXvBug7tvaV9kv4eVkV0rAOXb1i62A@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAMe9rOo9Pdc=2y_1bmJ4ER-K2r-trS2SD+W7QsWbT-8KGDr4hw@mail.gmail.com>
On Wed, Oct 3, 2012 at 8:59 AM, H.J. Lu <hjl.tools@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 3, 2012 at 8:43 AM, Mark Kettenis <mark.kettenis@xs4all.nl> wrote:
>>> Date: Wed, 3 Oct 2012 08:26:34 -0700
>>> From: "H.J. Lu" <hjl.tools@gmail.com>
>>>
>>> On Sun, Sep 30, 2012 at 2:40 PM, H.J. Lu <hjl.tools@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> > Hi,
>>> >
>>> > amd64_x32_init_abi has
>>> >
>>> > tdep->sp_regnum_from_eax = AMD64_RSP_REGNUM;
>>> > tdep->pc_regnum_from_eax = AMD64_RIP_REGNUM;
>>> >
>>> > But unwind frame info is based on the real RSP/RIP
>>> > registers. Pseudo sp/pc registers don't work with
>>> > frame related codes:
>>> >
>>> > [hjl@gnu-tools-1 gdb]$ egrep "pc_regnum|sp_regnum" *fram*.c
>>> > dwarf2-frame.c: if (regnum == gdbarch_pc_regnum (gdbarch))
>>> > dwarf2-frame.c: else if (regnum == gdbarch_sp_regnum (gdbarch))
>>> > dwarf2-frame.c: == gdbarch_sp_regnum (gdbarch)))
>>> > dwarf2-frame-tailcall.c: if (regnum == gdbarch_pc_regnum
>>> > (this_gdbarch))
>>> > dwarf2-frame-tailcall.c: else if (cache->prev_sp_p && regnum ==
>>> > gdbarch_sp_regnum (this_gdbarch))
>>> > dwarf2-frame-tailcall.c: int sp_regnum;
>>> > dwarf2-frame-tailcall.c: sp_regnum = gdbarch_sp_regnum
>>> > (prev_gdbarch);
>>> > dwarf2-frame-tailcall.c: if (sp_regnum == -1)
>>> > dwarf2-frame-tailcall.c: prev_sp = frame_unwind_register_unsigned
>>> > (this_frame, sp_regnum);
>>> > frame.c: && gdbarch_pc_regnum (gdbarch) >= 0
>>> > frame.c: gdbarch_pc_regnum (gdbarch),
>>> > frame.c: gdbarch_pc_regnum (gdbarch),
>>> > frame.c: the gdbarch_sp_regnum register is meaningful. */
>>> > frame.c: if (gdbarch_sp_regnum (gdbarch) >= 0)
>>> > frame.c: gdbarch_sp_regnum (gdbarch));
>>> > [hjl@gnu-tools-1 gdb]$
>>> >
>>> > It is nice to print
>>> >
>>> > (gdb) p $sp
>>> > $1 = (void *) 0xffffd028
>>> >
>>> > instead of
>>> >
>>> > (gdb) p $sp
>>> > $1 = 4294955048
>>> >
>>> > But it breaks frame unwind. This patch removes pseudo sp/pc regnum from
>>> > x32. "p $sp" and "p $pc" will print 64bit integers. But "p $esp" and
>>> > "p $esp" work fine. OK for trunk and 4.5 branch?
>>> >
>>> > Thanks.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > H.J.
>>> > ---
>>> > 2012-09-30 H.J. Lu <hongjiu.lu@intel.com>
>>> >
>>> > PR backtrace/14646
>>> > PR gdb/14647
>>> > * i386-tdep.h (gdbarch_tdep): Remove sp_regnum_from_eax and
>>> > pc_regnum_from_eax.
>>> > * i386-tdep.c (i386_gdbarch_init): Don't use sp_regnum_from_eax
>>> > nor pc_regnum_from_eax.
>>> > * amd64-tdep.c (amd64_x32_init_abi): Don't set sp_regnum_from_eax
>>> > nor pc_regnum_from_eax.
>>> >
>>
>> There's got to be a better way to handle that. Did you look into
>> using dwarf2_frame_set_init_reg() to establish mappings to the "raw"
>> rip and rsp registers?
>
> It doesn't work for x32 since gdbarch_sp_regnum and
> gdbarch_pc_regnum are used like:
>
> if (get_frame_func_if_available (this_frame, &entry_pc))
> {
> /* Decode the insns in the FDE up to the entry PC. */
> instr = execute_cfa_program (fde, fde->instructions, fde->end, gdbarch,
> entry_pc, fs);
>
> if (fs->regs.cfa_how == CFA_REG_OFFSET
> && (gdbarch_dwarf2_reg_to_regnum (gdbarch, fs->regs.cfa_reg)
> == gdbarch_sp_regnum (gdbarch)))
> {
> entry_cfa_sp_offset = fs->regs.cfa_offset;
> entry_cfa_sp_offset_p = 1;
> }
> }
>
> gdbarch_sp_regnum will return the wrong register number. If there are
> gdbarch_frame_sp_regnum and gdbarch_frame_pc_regnum, which
> default to gdbarch_sp_regnum and gdbarch_pc_regnum, respectively,
> and use them everywhere, except for "p $pc/$sp", x32 can set up proper
> gdbarch_frame_sp_regnum and gdbarch_frame_pc_regnum.
>
This patch adds frame_sp_regnum and frame_pc_regnum, which
are used for "p $pc"/"p $sp". I can override them for x32 with
static int
amd64_x32_frame_pc_regnum (struct gdbarch *gdbarch)
{
struct gdbarch_tdep *tdep = gdbarch_tdep (gdbarch);
return tdep->eax_regnum + AMD64_RIP_REGNUM;
}
static int
amd64_x32_frame_sp_regnum (struct gdbarch *gdbarch)
{
struct gdbarch_tdep *tdep = gdbarch_tdep (gdbarch);
return tdep->eax_regnum + AMD64_RSP_REGNUM;
}
Any comments?
Thanks.
--
H.J.
---
2012-10-03 H.J. Lu <hongjiu.lu@intel.com>
* frame.h (default_frame_pc_regnum): New prototype.
(default_frame_sp_regnum): Likewise.
* gdbarch.sh: Add frame_sp_regnum and frame_pc_regnum.
* std-regs.c (default_frame_pc_regnum): New function.
(default_frame_sp_regnum): Likewise.
(value_of_builtin_frame_pc_reg): Replace gdbarch_pc_regnum
with gdbarch_frame_pc_regnum.
(value_of_builtin_frame_sp_reg): Replace gdbarch_sp_regnum
with gdbarch_frame_sp_regnum.
* gdbarch.c: Regenerated.
* gdbarch.h: Likewise.
diff --git a/gdb/frame.h b/gdb/frame.h
index fa80663..750abc9 100644
--- a/gdb/frame.h
+++ b/gdb/frame.h
@@ -787,4 +787,10 @@ extern struct frame_info *create_new_frame
(CORE_ADDR base, CORE_ADDR pc);
extern int frame_unwinder_is (struct frame_info *fi,
const struct frame_unwind *unwinder);
+/* Return PC regnum for value_of_builtin_frame_pc_reg. */
+extern int default_frame_pc_regnum (struct gdbarch *gdbarch);
+
+/* Return SP regnum for value_of_builtin_frame_sp_reg. */
+extern int default_frame_sp_regnum (struct gdbarch *gdbarch);
+
#endif /* !defined (FRAME_H) */
diff --git a/gdb/gdbarch.sh b/gdb/gdbarch.sh
index c20b8ca..6ad6e08 100755
--- a/gdb/gdbarch.sh
+++ b/gdb/gdbarch.sh
@@ -449,6 +449,8 @@ M:int:ax_pseudo_register_push_stack:struct
agent_expr *ax, int reg:ax, reg
# gdbarch_sp_regnum will hopefully be replaced by UNWIND_SP.
v:int:sp_regnum:::-1:-1::0
v:int:pc_regnum:::-1:-1::0
+m:int:frame_sp_regnum:void:::default_frame_sp_regnum::0
+m:int:frame_pc_regnum:void:::default_frame_pc_regnum::0
v:int:ps_regnum:::-1:-1::0
v:int:fp0_regnum:::0:-1::0
# Convert stab register number (from \`r\' declaration) to a gdb REGNUM.
diff --git a/gdb/std-regs.c b/gdb/std-regs.c
index c5b97d6..4e47a07 100644
--- a/gdb/std-regs.c
+++ b/gdb/std-regs.c
@@ -26,6 +26,19 @@
#include "value.h"
#include "gdb_string.h"
+/* Return PC regnum for value_of_builtin_frame_pc_reg. */
+int
+default_frame_pc_regnum (struct gdbarch *gdbarch)
+{
+ return gdbarch_pc_regnum (gdbarch);
+}
+
+/* Return SP regnum for value_of_builtin_frame_sp_reg. */
+int
+default_frame_sp_regnum (struct gdbarch *gdbarch)
+{
+ return gdbarch_sp_regnum (gdbarch);
+}
static struct value *
value_of_builtin_frame_fp_reg (struct frame_info *frame, const void *baton)
@@ -58,8 +71,8 @@ value_of_builtin_frame_pc_reg (struct frame_info
*frame, const void *baton)
{
struct gdbarch *gdbarch = get_frame_arch (frame);
- if (gdbarch_pc_regnum (gdbarch) >= 0)
- return value_of_register (gdbarch_pc_regnum (gdbarch), frame);
+ if (gdbarch_frame_pc_regnum (gdbarch) >= 0)
+ return value_of_register (gdbarch_frame_pc_regnum (gdbarch), frame);
else
{
struct type *func_ptr_type = builtin_type (gdbarch)->builtin_func_ptr;
@@ -77,8 +90,8 @@ value_of_builtin_frame_sp_reg (struct frame_info
*frame, const void *baton)
{
struct gdbarch *gdbarch = get_frame_arch (frame);
- if (gdbarch_sp_regnum (gdbarch) >= 0)
- return value_of_register (gdbarch_sp_regnum (gdbarch), frame);
+ if (gdbarch_frame_sp_regnum (gdbarch) >= 0)
+ return value_of_register (gdbarch_frame_sp_regnum (gdbarch), frame);
error (_("Standard register ``$sp'' is not available for this target"));
}
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-10-03 17:03 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-10-03 15:26 H.J. Lu
2012-10-03 15:43 ` Mark Kettenis
2012-10-03 15:59 ` H.J. Lu
2012-10-03 17:03 ` H.J. Lu [this message]
2012-10-05 2:08 ` H.J. Lu
[not found] ` <20121003154712.GH3028@adacore.com>
[not found] ` <CAMe9rOreX6NAf08vD8=k4LBGevvTFUd-tqwwWmbsA3iRxxsE2A@mail.gmail.com>
[not found] ` <201210040657.q946vJlc006566@glazunov.sibelius.xs4all.nl>
[not found] ` <CAMe9rOounZ9e14QeMLvXR64gG5rJxQ9nNxt64YoLW54bx5VtHw@mail.gmail.com>
2012-10-08 19:48 ` Mark Kettenis
2012-10-08 20:04 ` H.J. Lu
2012-10-08 20:22 ` Mark Kettenis
2012-10-08 20:38 ` H.J. Lu
2012-10-08 20:47 ` Mark Kettenis
2012-10-08 21:01 ` H.J. Lu
2012-10-09 15:32 ` H.J. Lu
2012-10-09 15:40 ` Mark Kettenis
2012-10-09 15:48 ` Mark Kettenis
2012-10-09 16:35 ` H.J. Lu
2012-10-09 16:38 ` H.J. Lu
2012-10-15 10:10 ` Mark Kettenis
2012-10-15 20:41 ` H.J. Lu
2012-10-11 22:34 ` H.J. Lu
2012-10-12 8:31 ` Mark Kettenis
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=CAMe9rOrgAddwBuXZ7_9omXvBug7tvaV9kv4eVkV0rAOXb1i62A@mail.gmail.com \
--to=hjl.tools@gmail.com \
--cc=gdb-patches@sourceware.org \
--cc=mark.kettenis@xs4all.nl \
/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