From: Tom de Vries <tdevries@suse.de>
To: Hafiz Abid Qadeer <abid_qadeer@mentor.com>, Tom Tromey <tom@tromey.com>
Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH][gdb] Fix internal-error in process_event_stop_test
Date: Wed, 3 Feb 2021 10:55:25 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <f4b04ef5-f559-fcf7-059f-b67c09270b01@suse.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <c5cf4aa2-71fa-07df-9fe1-b81c57af2fec@mentor.com>
On 2/2/21 7:25 PM, Hafiz Abid Qadeer wrote:
> On 08/01/2021 05:23, Tom de Vries wrote:
>> On 1/7/21 9:10 PM, Tom Tromey wrote:
>>>>>>>> "Tom" == Tom de Vries <tdevries@suse.de> writes:
>>> Tom> Fix this by only trying to install the master exception breakpoint in
>>> Tom> libgcc.debug using the _Unwind_DebugHook method, if the install using probes
>>> Tom> in libgcc failed.
>>>
>>> This seems like a reasonable idea.
>>>
>>> Tom> Any comments?
>>>
>>> I suspect this would be a bit shorter if the loop only examined
>>> "primary" objfiles (ones that don't have a backlink) and then delegated
>>> to a helper function that did the search. What do you think?
>> I've made the loop now over "primary" objfiles. Also, I've split up the
>> helper function into one using probes, and the other using the hook,
>> which hopefully helps to make the code a bit clearer.
>>
>> I'll put this through testing and commit, unless there are further comments.
>
> Hi Tom,
> I observed that nextoverthrow.exp is now failing for many targets
> including arm-none-eabi after this change.
>
>> + /* Iterate over separate debug objects and try an _Unwind_DebugHook
>> + kind breakpoint. */
>> + for (objfile *sepdebug = obj->separate_debug_objfile;
>> + sepdebug != nullptr; sepdebug = sepdebug->separate_debug_objfile)
>> + if (create_exception_master_breakpoint_hook (sepdebug))
>> + break;
>
> This bit seems to be problematic as it is stopping exception breakpoint
> to be installed when separate_debug_objfile is null.
Hi Abid,
thanks for the report and the analysis. I've filed this here (
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27330 ).
I've posted (in the PR) a tentative patch, that causes no regression in
my test setup. Can you verify that it fixes the problems you're seeing?
Thanks,
- Tom
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-02-03 9:55 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-01-05 13:29 Tom de Vries
2021-01-07 20:10 ` Tom Tromey
2021-01-08 5:23 ` Tom de Vries
2021-02-02 18:25 ` Hafiz Abid Qadeer
2021-02-03 9:55 ` Tom de Vries [this message]
2021-02-03 10:58 ` Hafiz Abid Qadeer
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=f4b04ef5-f559-fcf7-059f-b67c09270b01@suse.de \
--to=tdevries@suse.de \
--cc=abid_qadeer@mentor.com \
--cc=gdb-patches@sourceware.org \
--cc=tom@tromey.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