Re: [PATCHv2] gdb/mi: fix use after free of frame_info causing spurious notifications

Simon Marchi
2022-03-24T20:32:30Z

On 2022-03-24 14:52, Andrew Burgess via Gdb-patches wrote:
> Simon,
>
> Thanks for the feedback. I believe this addresses all your points.
> What do you think?
>
> Thanks,
> Andrew
>
> ---
>
> In commit:
>
> commit a2757c4ed693cef4ecc4dcdcb2518353eb6b3c3f
> Date: Wed Mar 16 15:08:22 2022 +0000
>
> gdb/mi: consistently notify user when GDB/MI client uses -thread-select
>
> Changes were made to GDB to address some inconsistencies in when
> notifications are sent from a MI terminal to a CLI terminal (when
> multiple terminals are in use, see new-ui command).
>
> Unfortunately, in order to track when the currently selected frame has
> changed, that commit grabs a frame_info pointer before and after an MI
> command has executed, and compares the pointers to see if the frame
> has changed.
>
> This is not safe.
>
> If the frame cache is deleted for any reason then the frame_info
> pointer captured before the command started, is no longer valid, and
> any comparisons based on that pointer are undefined.
>
> This was leading to random test failures for some folk, see:
>
> https://sourceware.org/pipermail/gdb-patches/2022-March/186867.html
>
> This commit changes GDB so we no longer hold frame_info pointers, but
> instead store the frame_id and frame_level, this is safe even when the
> frame cache is flushed.
> ---
> gdb/mi/mi-main.c | 43 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----------
> 1 file changed, 33 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/gdb/mi/mi-main.c b/gdb/mi/mi-main.c
> index abd033b22ae..28d4afc28c0 100644
> --- a/gdb/mi/mi-main.c
> +++ b/gdb/mi/mi-main.c
> @@ -1974,27 +1974,50 @@ struct user_selected_context
> {
> /* Constructor. */
> user_selected_context ()
> - : m_previous_ptid (inferior_ptid),
> - m_previous_frame (deprecated_safe_get_selected_frame ())
> - { /* Nothing. */ }
> + : m_previous_ptid (inferior_ptid)
> + {
> + save_selected_frame (&m_previous_frame_id, &m_previous_frame_level);
> + }
>
> /* Return true if the user selected context has changed since this object
> was created. */
> bool has_changed () const
> {
> - return ((m_previous_ptid != null_ptid
> - && inferior_ptid != null_ptid
> - && m_previous_ptid != inferior_ptid)
> - || m_previous_frame != deprecated_safe_get_selected_frame ());
> + /* Did the selected thread change? */
> + if (m_previous_ptid != null_ptid && inferior_ptid != null_ptid
> + && m_previous_ptid != inferior_ptid)
> + return true;
> +
> + /* Grab details of the currently selected frame, for comparison. */
> + frame_id current_frame_id;
> + int current_frame_level;
> + save_selected_frame (&current_frame_id, &current_frame_level);
> +
> + /* Did the selected frame level change? */
> + if (current_frame_level != m_previous_frame_level)
> + return true;
> +
> + /* Did the selected frame id change? If the innermost frame is
> + selected then the level will be -1, and the frame-id will be
> + null_frame_id. As comparing null_frame_id with itself always
> + reports not-equal, we only do the equality test if we have something
> + other than the innermost frame selected. */
> + if (current_frame_level != -1
> + && !frame_id_eq (current_frame_id, m_previous_frame_id))
> + return true;
> +
> + /* Nothing changed! */
> + return false;
> }
> private:
> /* The previously selected thread. This might be null_ptid if there was
> no previously selected thread. */
> ptid_t m_previous_ptid;
>
> - /* The previously selected frame. This might be nullptr if there was no
> - previously selected frame. */
> - frame_info *m_previous_frame;
> + /* The previously selected frame. If the innermost frame is selected
> + then the frame_id will be null_frame_id, and the level will be -1. */

I noticed you changed this from "if no frame is currently selected" to
"if the innermost frame is selected". I think that both can happen,
actually:

- if you execute an MI command while the target is running, there is no
selected frame
- if you execute an MI command while the innermost frame is selected

So my understanding is that you could mention both (although it might
become a bit redundant with the big comment on top of selected_frame_id,
in frame.c).

LGTM in any case.

Simon