From: Luis Machado via Gdb-patches <gdb-patches@sourceware.org>
To: will schmidt <will_schmidt@vnet.ibm.com>,
Carl Love <cel@us.ibm.com>, Tom de Vries <tdevries@suse.de>,
gdb-patches@sourceware.org,
Ulrich Weigand <Ulrich.Weigand@de.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH][gdb/testsuite] Fix gdb.dwarf2/dw2-dir-file-name.exp
Date: Tue, 16 Aug 2022 08:43:14 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <e60c604b-390c-7707-877d-4d4b1c22eb5c@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <10b3195562b41db8f77d3c0cbd984d0da270190e.camel@vnet.ibm.com>
On 8/15/22 20:12, will schmidt wrote:
> On Mon, 2022-08-15 at 09:54 -0700, Carl Love wrote:
>> Tom:
>>
>> OK, I took a look at how the test used to work and how it is now
>> working and I see what the issue is.
>>
>> PowerPC has two entry points, local and global. The test used to set
>> the breakpoint for the function at the local entry point. With your
>> changes, the breakpoint is now being set at the global breakpoint
>> which
>> is before the local breakpoint. The function is actually entered at
>> the local breakpoint thus gdb never "sees" the breakpoint that was
>> set.
>> Specfically, here is the objdump for the test:
>>
>> 00000000100006e0 <compdir_missing__ldir_missing__file_basename>:
>> 100006e0: 02 10 40
>> 3c lis r2,4098 <- Global entry point
>> 100006e4: 00 7f 42 38 addi r2,r2,32512
>> 100006e8: f8 ff e1 fb std r31,-8(r1)
>> 100006ec: d1 ff 21 f8 stdu r1,-48(r1)
>> 100006f0: 78 0b 3f 7c mr r31,r1
>> 100006f4: 00 00 00
>> 60 nop <- Local entry point
>> 100006f8: 28 81 22 39 addi r9,r2,-32472
>> 100006fc: 00 00 29 81 lwz r9,0(r9)
>> 10000700: 01 00 49 39 addi r10,r9,1
>> 10000704: 00 00 00 60 nop
>> 10000708: 28 81 22 39 addi r9,r2,-32472
>> 1000070c: 00 00 49 91 stw r10,0(r9)
>> 10000710: 30 00 3f 38 addi r1,r31,48
>> 10000714: f8 ff e1 eb ld r31,-8(r1)
>> 10000718: 20 00 80 4e blr
>>
>> When I look at the output before the patch, we see:
>>
>> Breakpoint 2, 0x00000000100006f4 in
>> compdir_missing__ldir_missing__file_basename () at tmp-dw2-dir-file-
>> name.c:999
>>
>> (gdb) PASS: gdb.dwarf2/dw2-dir-file-name.exp:
>> compdir_missing__ldir_missing__file_basename: continue to breakpoint:
>> compdir_missing__ldir_missing__file_basename
>> set filename-display absolute
>>
>>
>> Note the breakpoint 2 address is 0x00000000100006f4 which is on the
>> NOP. Instructions at addresses 0x100006e0 to 100006f0 are part of
>> the
>> code when the function is called via the global entry point. So
>> previously, the breakpoint was set at local entry point.
>>
>> With the patch, we now see:
>>
>> Breakpoint 2 at 0x100006e0: file tmp-dw2-dir-file-name.c, line
>> 999.
>> (gdb) continue
>>
>> Continuing.
>> [Inferior 1 (process 2520351) exited normally]
>> (gdb) FAIL: gdb.dwarf2/dw2-dir-file-name.exp:
>> compdir_missing__ldir_missing__file_basename: continue to breakpoint:
>> compdir_missing__ldir_missing__file_basename (the program exited)
>>
>> Now we note that the breakpoint 2 is set at 0x100006e0 which is the
>> global entry point.
>>
>> It looks to me that we need to make sure we set the breakpoint at the
>> local address.
>>
>> Off hand, I am not sure how to get your changes to "proc
>> gdb_continue_to_breakpoint" to select the local entry point not the
>> global entry point. Perhaps Ulrich has some ideas???
>
>
> From a glance that the patch that updated dw2-dir-file-name.exp;
> ( commit cd919f5533cc8aa495acd75a6f059e5fcf2e6af9 )
> the change there was effectively
>
> - gdb_breakpoint $func
> + gdb_breakpoint *$func
>
> with assorted regexp changes to match.
>
> The patch description goes into detail, but I interpret the gist of it
> as avoiding the aarch64 architecture prologue skipper, since that
> prologue skipper does something wrong, with entanglements in the line
> table info.
Though the aarch64 prologue skipper is indeed mistaken here, Tom's patch only
makes the test less reliant on whatever prologue skippers do and instead just
got for a breakpoint straight at the entry point.
It is a void function with void return type, so no much going on. Maybe it needs
to be adapted somewhat to the PowerPC case?
>
> The powerpc prologue skipper (wherever it is) was presumably handling
> the local/global entry points properly. Since the test now species a
> specific address (*$func), the prologue skipper is no longer involved.
How does powerpc handle a breakpoint at a particular address?
>
> The patch should probably be reverted, but I defer to others if I've
> misunderstood part of this issue..
>
> Thanks
> -Will
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>>
>> Carl Love
>>
>>
>> On Mon, 2022-08-15 at 09:01 -0700, Carl Love wrote:
>>
>>> Looks like the patch was applied last Friday. We are now seeing
>>> 129
>>> test failures related to this commit on PowerPC. The failures are
>>> seen
>>> on Power 8, 9 and 10.
>>>
>>> Here is an initial bit of the failures:
>>>
>>> ...
>>> Breakpoint 2 at 0x100006e0: file tmp-dw2-dir-file-name.c, line 999.
>>> (gdb) continue
>>> Continuing.
>>> [Inferior 1 (process 2520351) exited normally]
>>> (gdb) FAIL: gdb.dwarf2/dw2-dir-file-name.exp:
>>> compdir_missing__ldir_missing__file_basename: continue to
>>> breakpoint:
>>> compdir_missing__ldir_missing__file_basename (the program exited)
>>> set filename-display absolute
>>> (gdb) PASS: gdb.dwarf2/dw2-dir-file-name.exp:
>>> compdir_missing__ldir_missing__file_basename: set filename-display
>>> absolute
>>> expect: /home/carll/GDB/build-
>>> current/gdb/testsuite/outputs/gdb.dwarf2/dw2-dir-file-name/dw2-dir-
>>> file-name.d/rdir/tmp-dw2-dir-file-name.c
>>> frame
>>> No stack.
>>> (gdb) FAIL: gdb.dwarf2/dw2-dir-file-name.exp:
>>> compdir_missing__ldir_missing__file_basename: absolute
>>> set filename-display basename
>>> (gdb) PASS: gdb.dwarf2/dw2-dir-file-name.exp:
>>> compdir_missing__ldir_missing__file_basename: set filename-display
>>> basename
>>> expect: tmp-dw2-dir-file-name.c
>>> frame
>>> No stack.
>>> (gdb) FAIL: gdb.dwarf2/dw2-dir-file-name.exp:
>>> compdir_missing__ldir_missing__file_basename: basename
>>> set filename-display relative
>>> (gdb) PASS: gdb.dwarf2/dw2-dir-file-name.exp:
>>> compdir_missing__ldir_missing__file_basename: set filename-display
>>> relative
>>> expect: tmp-dw2-dir-file-name.c
>>> frame
>>> No stack.
>>> (gdb) FAIL: gdb.dwarf2/dw2-dir-file-name.exp:
>>> compdir_missing__ldir_missing__file_basename: relative
>>> set directories
>>> (gdb) PASS: gdb.dwarf2/dw2-dir-file-name.exp:
>>> compdir_missing__ldir_missing__file_relative: set directories
>>> break *compdir_missing__ldir_missing__file_relative
>>> Breakpoint 3 at 0x10000728: file fdir/tmp-dw2-dir-file-name.c, line
>>> 999.
>>> (gdb) continue
>>> The program is not being run.
>>>
>>> etc.
>>>
>>> === gdb Summary ===
>>>
>>> # of expected passes 129
>>> # of unexpected failures 128
>>>
>>> I have not had time yet to try and dig into the failures to figure
>>> out
>>> the cause. I will take a look at the failures to see what is going
>>> on.
>>>
>>> Anyway, just wanted to let you know what I am seeing on PowerPC.
>>>
>>> Carl
>>>
>>> On Fri, 2022-08-12 at 10:33 +0100, Luis Machado via Gdb-patches
>>> wrote:
>>>> On 8/11/22 12:58, Tom de Vries wrote:
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>
>>>>> When running test-case gdb.dwarf2/dw2-dir-file-name.exp on
>>>>> x86_64-
>>>>> linux, we
>>>>> have:
>>>>> ...
>>>>> (gdb) break compdir_missing__ldir_missing__file_basename^M
>>>>> Breakpoint 2 at 0x4004c4: file tmp-dw2-dir-file-name.c, line
>>>>> 999.^M
>>>>> (gdb) continue^M
>>>>> Continuing.^M
>>>>> ^M
>>>>> Breakpoint 2, 0x00000000004004c4 in \
>>>>> compdir_missing__ldir_missing__file_basename () \
>>>>> at tmp-dw2-dir-file-name.c:999^M
>>>>> (gdb) PASS: gdb.dwarf2/dw2-dir-file-name.exp: \
>>>>> compdir_missing__ldir_missing__file_basename: continue to
>>>>> breakpoint: \
>>>>> compdir_missing__ldir_missing__file_basename
>>>>> ...
>>>>>
>>>>> When trying to set a breakpoint on
>>>>> compdir_missing__ldir_missing__file_basename, the architecture-
>>>>> specific
>>>>> prologue skipper starts at 0x4004c0 and skips past two insns,
>>>>> to
>>>>> 0x4004c4:
>>>>> ...
>>>>> 00000000004004c0
>>>>> <compdir_missing__ldir_missing__file_basename>:
>>>>> 4004c0: 55 push %rbp
>>>>> 4004c1: 48 89 e5 mov %rsp,%rbp
>>>>> 4004c4: 8b 05 72 1b 20
>>>>> 00 mov 0x201b72(%rip),%eax # 60203c <v>
>>>>> 4004ca: 83 c0 01 add $0x1,%eax
>>>>> 4004cd: 89 05 69 1b 20
>>>>> 00 mov %eax,0x201b69(%rip) # 60203c <v>
>>>>> 4004d3: 90 nop
>>>>> 4004d4: 5d pop %rbp
>>>>> 4004d5: c3 ret
>>>>> ...
>>>>>
>>>>> And because the line table info is rudamentary:
>>>>> ...
>>>>> CU: tmp-dw2-dir-file-name.c:
>>>>> File name Line number Starting
>>>>> address View Stmt
>>>>> tmp-dw2-dir-file-
>>>>> name.c 999 0x4004c0 x
>>>>> tmp-dw2-dir-file-
>>>>> name.c 1000 0x4004d6 x
>>>>> tmp-dw2-dir-file-name.c - 0x4004d6
>>>>> ...
>>>>> the address does not fall at an actual line, so the breakpoint
>>>>> is
>>>>> shown with
>>>>> address, both when setting it and hitting it.
>>>>>
>>>>> when running the test-case with aarch64-linux, we have
>>>>> similarly:
>>>>> ...
>>>>> (gdb) break compdir_missing__ldir_missing__file_basename^M
>>>>> Breakpoint 2 at 0x400618: file tmp-dw2-dir-file-name.c, line
>>>>> 999.^M
>>>>> ...
>>>>> due to the architecture-specific prologue skipper starting at
>>>>> 0x400610 and
>>>>> skipping past two insns, to 0x400618:
>>>>> ...
>>>>> 0000000000400610
>>>>> <compdir_missing__ldir_missing__file_basename>:
>>>>> 400610: 90000100 adrp x0, 420000 <
>>>>> __libc_start_main@GLIBC_2.17>
>>>>> 400614: 9100b000 add x0, x0, #0x2c
>>>>> 400618: b9400000 ldr w0, [x0]
>>>>> 40061c: 11000401 add w1, w0, #0x1
>>>>> 400620: 90000100 adrp x0, 420000 <
>>>>> __libc_start_main@GLIBC_2.17>
>>>>> 400624: 9100b000 add x0, x0, #0x2c
>>>>> 400628: b9000001 str w1, [x0]
>>>>> 40062c: d503201f nop
>>>>> 400630: d65f03c0 ret
>>>>> ...
>>>>>
>>>>> But interestingly, the aarch64 architecture-specific prologue
>>>>> skipper is
>>>>> wrong. There is no prologue, and the breakpoint should be set
>>>>> at
>>>>> 0x400610.
>>>>>
>>>>> By using "break *compdir_missing__ldir_missing__file_basename"
>>>>> we can get the breakpoint set at 0x400610:
>>>>> ...
>>>>> (gdb) break *compdir_missing__ldir_missing__file_basename^M
>>>>> Breakpoint 2 at 0x400610: file tmp-dw2-dir-file-name.c, line
>>>>> 999.^M
>>>>> ...
>>>>> and make the test-case independent of prologue analysis.
>>>>>
>>>>> This requires us to update the expected patterns.
>>>>>
>>>>> The fix ensures that once the aarch64 architecture-specific
>>>>> prologue skipper
>>>>> will be fixed, this test-case won't start failing.
>>>>>
>>>>> Tested on x86_64-linux.
>>>>>
>>>>> Any comments?
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>> - Tom
>>>>>
>>>>> [gdb/testsuite] Fix gdb.dwarf2/dw2-dir-file-name.exp
>>>>>
>>>>> ---
>>>>> gdb/testsuite/gdb.dwarf2/dw2-dir-file-name.exp | 8 ++++----
>>>>> gdb/testsuite/lib/gdb.exp | 7 ++++++-
>>>>> 2 files changed, 10 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>>>>>
>>>>> diff --git a/gdb/testsuite/gdb.dwarf2/dw2-dir-file-name.exp
>>>>> b/gdb/testsuite/gdb.dwarf2/dw2-dir-file-name.exp
>>>>> index 4d3f767f597..4c4c1ff07af 100644
>>>>> --- a/gdb/testsuite/gdb.dwarf2/dw2-dir-file-name.exp
>>>>> +++ b/gdb/testsuite/gdb.dwarf2/dw2-dir-file-name.exp
>>>>> @@ -396,20 +396,20 @@ proc test { func compdir filename } {
>>>>> error "not absolute"
>>>>> }
>>>>>
>>>>> - gdb_breakpoint $func
>>>>> + gdb_breakpoint *$func
>>>>> gdb_continue_to_breakpoint $func "$func \\(\\) at .*"
>>>>>
>>>>> gdb_test_no_output "set filename-display absolute"
>>>>> verbose -log "expect: ${absolute}"
>>>>> - gdb_test "frame" " in $func \\(\\) at [string_to_regexp
>>>>> ${absolute}]:999" "absolute"
>>>>> + gdb_test "frame" "#0 $func \\(\\) at [string_to_regexp
>>>>> ${absolute}]:999" "absolute"
>>>>>
>>>>> gdb_test_no_output "set filename-display basename"
>>>>> verbose -log "expect: [file tail $filename]"
>>>>> - gdb_test "frame" " in $func \\(\\) at [string_to_regexp
>>>>> [file
>>>>> tail $filename]]:999" "basename"
>>>>> + gdb_test "frame" "#0 $func \\(\\) at [string_to_regexp
>>>>> [file
>>>>> tail $filename]]:999" "basename"
>>>>>
>>>>> gdb_test_no_output "set filename-display relative"
>>>>> verbose -log "expect: $filename"
>>>>> - gdb_test "frame" " in $func \\(\\) at [string_to_regexp
>>>>> $filename]:999" "relative"
>>>>> + gdb_test "frame" "#0 $func \\(\\) at [string_to_regexp
>>>>> $filename]:999" "relative"
>>>>> }
>>>>> }
>>>>>
>>>>> diff --git a/gdb/testsuite/lib/gdb.exp
>>>>> b/gdb/testsuite/lib/gdb.exp
>>>>> index a8f25b5f0dd..70fc019eeb9 100644
>>>>> --- a/gdb/testsuite/lib/gdb.exp
>>>>> +++ b/gdb/testsuite/lib/gdb.exp
>>>>> @@ -787,9 +787,14 @@ proc gdb_continue_to_breakpoint {name
>>>>> {location_pattern .*}} {
>>>>> global gdb_prompt
>>>>> set full_name "continue to breakpoint: $name"
>>>>>
>>>>> + set re_at_in " (at|in) " <-NEED
>>>>> TO FIX TO ALWAYS GIVE local entry point for POWERPC
>>>>> ??
>>>>>
>>>>> + if { [regexp $re_at_in $location_pattern] } {
>>>>> + set re_at_in " "
>>>>> + }
>>>>> +
>>>>> set kfail_pattern "Process record does not support
>>>>> instruction 0xfae64 at.*"
>>>>> gdb_test_multiple "continue" $full_name {
>>>>> - -re "(?:Breakpoint|Temporary breakpoint) .* (at|in)
>>>>> $location_pattern\r\n$gdb_prompt $" {
>>>>> + -re "(?:Breakpoint|Temporary breakpoint)
>>>>> .*$re_at_in$location_pattern\r\n$gdb_prompt $" {
>>>>> pass $full_name
>>>>> }
>>>>> -re "\[\r\n\]*(?:$kfail_pattern)\[\r\n\]+$gdb_prompt $"
>>>>> {
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-08-16 7:43 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-08-11 11:58 Tom de Vries via Gdb-patches
2022-08-12 9:33 ` Luis Machado via Gdb-patches
2022-08-15 16:01 ` Carl Love via Gdb-patches
2022-08-15 16:54 ` Carl Love via Gdb-patches
2022-08-15 19:12 ` will schmidt via Gdb-patches
2022-08-15 19:31 ` Thiago Jung Bauermann via Gdb-patches
2022-08-15 21:33 ` will schmidt via Gdb-patches
2022-08-16 7:43 ` Luis Machado via Gdb-patches [this message]
2022-08-16 16:00 ` will schmidt via Gdb-patches
2022-08-17 12:01 ` Ulrich Weigand via Gdb-patches
2022-09-01 14:40 ` Tom de Vries via Gdb-patches
2022-09-01 14:16 ` Tom de Vries via Gdb-patches
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=e60c604b-390c-7707-877d-4d4b1c22eb5c@arm.com \
--to=gdb-patches@sourceware.org \
--cc=Ulrich.Weigand@de.ibm.com \
--cc=cel@us.ibm.com \
--cc=luis.machado@arm.com \
--cc=tdevries@suse.de \
--cc=will_schmidt@vnet.ibm.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