From: Hui Zhu <teawater@gmail.com>
To: Michael Snyder <msnyder@vmware.com>
Cc: gdb-patches ml <gdb-patches@sourceware.org>
Subject: Re: Bug in i386_process_record?
Date: Sun, 16 Aug 2009 16:12:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <daef60380908160846w57db2c7frcac0409a7ae8d73e@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <daef60380908102319k56787d57w49ea1cf4ed338584@mail.gmail.com>
Ping
On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 14:19, Hui Zhu<teawater@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 05:57, Michael Snyder <msnyder@vmware.com> wrote:
>>
>> Yes, this seems to be better. It records only 4 bytes each time
>> it is called.
>>
>> But there seems to be still an off-by-one error? With the test
>> program that I provided, we call memset with an argument of
>> 1024, but we actually record 1025 bytes... this code gets hit
>> 257 times, with the last time recording only 1 byte.
>>
>>
>
> Hi Michael,
>
> This issue is because:
>
> 0xb7edf4e7 <memset+55>: rep stos %eax,%es:(%edi)
> 0xb7edf4e9 <memset+57>: mov %edx,%ecx
> 0xb7edf4eb <memset+59>: rep stos %al,%es:(%edi)
> 0xb7edf4ed <memset+61>: mov 0x8(%esp),%eax
> 0xb7edf4f1 <memset+65>: pop %edi
>
> If the memcpy size is not align with 4, it will handle by second rep stos.
> Then rep stos will not execute if %ecx is 0.
> i386_process_record doesn't check %ecx, so it get this error.
>
> I make a new patch for it. Please help me review it.
>
> Thanks,
> Hui
>
> 2009-08-11 Hui Zhu <teawater@gmail.com>
>
> * record.c (i386_process_record): Remove some error code.
>
> ---
> i386-tdep.c | 61 +++++++++++++++++++++++-------------------------------------
> 1 file changed, 24 insertions(+), 37 deletions(-)
>
> --- a/i386-tdep.c
> +++ b/i386-tdep.c
> @@ -4441,50 +4441,37 @@ reswitch:
> /* insS */
> case 0x6c:
> case 0x6d:
> - if ((opcode & 1) == 0)
> - ir.ot = OT_BYTE;
> - else
> - ir.ot = ir.dflag + OT_WORD;
> regcache_raw_read_unsigned (ir.regcache,
> - ir.regmap[X86_RECORD_REDI_REGNUM],
> + ir.regmap[X86_RECORD_RECX_REGNUM],
> &tmpulongest);
> - if (!ir.aflag)
> - {
> - tmpulongest &= 0xffff;
> - /* addr += ((uint32_t) read_register (I386_ES_REGNUM)) << 4; */
> - if (record_debug)
> - printf_unfiltered (_("Process record ignores the memory change "
> - "of instruction at address 0x%s because "
> - "it can't get the value of the segment "
> - "register.\n"),
> - paddress (gdbarch, ir.addr));
> - }
> - if (prefixes & (PREFIX_REPZ | PREFIX_REPNZ))
> + if (tmpulongest)
> {
> - ULONGEST count, eflags;
> + if ((opcode & 1) == 0)
> + ir.ot = OT_BYTE;
> + else
> + ir.ot = ir.dflag + OT_WORD;
> regcache_raw_read_unsigned (ir.regcache,
> ir.regmap[X86_RECORD_REDI_REGNUM],
> - &count);
> - if (!ir.aflag)
> - count &= 0xffff;
> - regcache_raw_read_unsigned (ir.regcache,
> - ir.regmap[X86_RECORD_EFLAGS_REGNUM],
> - &eflags);
> - if ((eflags >> 10) & 0x1)
> - tmpulongest -= (count - 1) * (1 << ir.ot);
> - if (record_arch_list_add_mem (tmpulongest, count * (1 << ir.ot)))
> - return -1;
> - I386_RECORD_ARCH_LIST_ADD_REG (X86_RECORD_RECX_REGNUM);
> - }
> - else
> - {
> + &tmpulongest);
> + if (ir.aflag)
> + {
> + /* addr += ((uint32_t) read_register (I386_ES_REGNUM)) << 4; */
> + if (record_debug)
> + printf_unfiltered (_("Process record ignores the
> memory change "
> + "of instruction at address 0x%s because "
> + "it can't get the value of the segment "
> + "register.\n"),
> + paddress (gdbarch, ir.addr));
> + }
> + if (prefixes & (PREFIX_REPZ | PREFIX_REPNZ))
> + I386_RECORD_ARCH_LIST_ADD_REG (X86_RECORD_RECX_REGNUM);
> if (record_arch_list_add_mem (tmpulongest, 1 << ir.ot))
> return -1;
> - }
> - if (opcode == 0xa4 || opcode == 0xa5)
> - I386_RECORD_ARCH_LIST_ADD_REG (X86_RECORD_RESI_REGNUM);
> - I386_RECORD_ARCH_LIST_ADD_REG (X86_RECORD_REDI_REGNUM);
> - I386_RECORD_ARCH_LIST_ADD_REG (X86_RECORD_EFLAGS_REGNUM);
> + if (opcode == 0xa4 || opcode == 0xa5)
> + I386_RECORD_ARCH_LIST_ADD_REG (X86_RECORD_RESI_REGNUM);
> + I386_RECORD_ARCH_LIST_ADD_REG (X86_RECORD_REDI_REGNUM);
> + I386_RECORD_ARCH_LIST_ADD_REG (X86_RECORD_EFLAGS_REGNUM);
> + }
> break;
>
> /* cmpsS */
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-08-16 15:47 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 41+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <4A7BA1DE.6010103@vmware.com>
2009-08-10 9:33 ` Hui Zhu
2009-08-10 22:12 ` Michael Snyder
2009-08-11 6:20 ` Hui Zhu
2009-08-11 18:31 ` Hui Zhu
2009-08-16 16:12 ` Hui Zhu [this message]
2009-08-18 5:35 ` Michael Snyder
2009-08-18 11:52 ` Hui Zhu
2009-08-21 3:23 ` Hui Zhu
2009-08-23 3:15 ` Michael Snyder
2009-08-23 3:33 ` Hui Zhu
2009-08-23 4:13 ` Michael Snyder
2009-08-23 9:04 ` Hui Zhu
2009-08-23 17:37 ` Hui Zhu
2009-08-23 18:23 ` Michael Snyder
2009-08-23 18:32 ` Eli Zaretskii
2009-08-23 23:53 ` Hui Zhu
2009-08-23 23:56 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2009-08-24 0:01 ` Hui Zhu
2009-08-24 7:46 ` Eli Zaretskii
2009-08-24 3:15 ` Hui Zhu
2009-08-24 19:20 ` Eli Zaretskii
2009-08-25 5:04 ` Hui Zhu
2009-08-25 18:45 ` Eli Zaretskii
2009-08-26 3:19 ` Hui Zhu
2009-08-26 3:27 ` Eli Zaretskii
2009-08-26 7:20 ` Hui Zhu
2009-08-26 17:37 ` Eli Zaretskii
2009-08-27 0:05 ` Michael Snyder
2009-08-27 0:32 ` Michael Snyder
2009-08-27 1:50 ` Hui Zhu
2009-08-27 15:35 ` Hui Zhu
2009-08-28 1:44 ` Michael Snyder
2009-08-28 2:14 ` Hui Zhu
2009-08-28 6:16 ` Michael Snyder
2009-08-28 8:46 ` Hui Zhu
2009-08-30 1:12 ` Michael Snyder
2009-08-27 1:44 ` Hui Zhu
2009-08-29 6:51 ` Hui Zhu
2009-08-24 20:31 ` Eli Zaretskii
2009-08-25 6:53 ` Hui Zhu
2009-08-23 18:24 ` Eli Zaretskii
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=daef60380908160846w57db2c7frcac0409a7ae8d73e@mail.gmail.com \
--to=teawater@gmail.com \
--cc=gdb-patches@sourceware.org \
--cc=msnyder@vmware.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