Mirror of the gdb mailing list
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>
To: gdb@sourceware.org
Subject: Strange backtrace from GDB 7.5.91
Date: Wed, 20 Mar 2013 17:45:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <83ppyuynhd.fsf@gnu.org> (raw)

I saw today a very strange backtrace, while debugging with GDB 7.5.91,
which I got by stepping through relocate_gdb_directory:

  (top-gdb) s
  relocate_path (flag=1, initial=0x71a51b "d:/usr/share/gdb",
      progname=0x260ed0 "d:\\usr\\eli\\utils\\gdb-7.5.91\\gdb\\gdb.exe")
      at main.c:124
  124       dir = relocate_path (gdb_program_name, initial, flag);
  (top-gdb) bt
  #0  relocate_path (flag=1, initial=0x71a51b "d:/usr/share/gdb",
      progname=0x260ed0 "d:\\usr\\eli\\utils\\gdb-7.5.91\\gdb\\gdb.exe")
      at main.c:124
  #1  relocate_gdb_directory (
      initial=initial@entry=0x71a51b "d:/usr/share/gdb", flag=flag@entry=1)
      at main.c:124
  #2  0x004f0b1d in captured_main (data=data@entry=0x572ff10) at main.c:399

But relocate_path's argument list is this:

  relocate_path (const char *progname, const char *initial, int flag)

i.e., the FLAG argument is the last one, not the first one.

After one more "step", relocate_path appears twice in the backtrace,
once with correct order of arguments, the other one with an incorrect
order:

  (top-gdb) s
  relocate_path (initial=0x71a51b "d:/usr/share/gdb",
      progname=0x260ed0 "d:\\usr\\eli\\utils\\gdb-7.5.91\\gdb\\gdb.exe",
      flag=<optimized out>) at main.c:109
  109         return make_relative_prefix (progname, BINDIR, initial);
  (top-gdb) bt
  #0  relocate_path (initial=0x71a51b "d:/usr/share/gdb",
      progname=0x260ed0 "d:\\usr\\eli\\utils\\gdb-7.5.91\\gdb\\gdb.exe",
      flag=<optimized out>) at main.c:109
  #1  relocate_path (flag=1, initial=0x71a51b "d:/usr/share/gdb",
      progname=0x260ed0 "d:\\usr\\eli\\utils\\gdb-7.5.91\\gdb\\gdb.exe")
      at main.c:120
  #2  relocate_gdb_directory (
      initial=initial@entry=0x71a51b "d:/usr/share/gdb", flag=flag@entry=1)
      at main.c:124
  #3  0x004f0b1d in captured_main (data=data@entry=0x572ff10) at main.c:399

Is this due to inlining or something?  Is this a bug?

The compiler was GCC 4.7.2, if that matters, and the compilation
switches were "-g3 -O2".  MinGW GCC produced DWARF-2 debug info.


             reply	other threads:[~2013-03-20 17:45 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2013-03-20 17:45 Eli Zaretskii [this message]
2013-03-20 17:58 ` Jan Kratochvil
2013-03-20 18:04   ` Eli Zaretskii
2013-03-20 18:07     ` Jan Kratochvil

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=83ppyuynhd.fsf@gnu.org \
    --to=eliz@gnu.org \
    --cc=gdb@sourceware.org \
    /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