From: Richard Szibele <richard@szibele.com>
To: Simon Marchi <simon.marchi@polymtl.ca>
Cc: gdb@sourceware.org
Subject: Re: GDB 7.12.1: Strange "stepping" behavior
Date: Sun, 23 Apr 2017 18:28:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <b1e64bec-b0d9-f5fa-aa56-3bfb439b64e4@szibele.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <a012563c3b6f9c42a9511d30fec76488@polymtl.ca>
On 23/04/17 18:21, Simon Marchi wrote:
> On 2017-04-22 19:06, Richard Szibele wrote:
>> Hello everyone,
>>
>> I am experiencing strange stepping behavior with GDB 7.12.1 and a
>> program compiled with g++ (GCC) 5.4.0 which I can demonstrate with a
>> simple example:
>>
>>
>> #include <memory>
>> #include <iostream>
>>
>> int main()
>> {
>> auto ptr = std::shared_ptr<int>(new int);
>> *ptr = 100;
>> std::cout << *ptr << std::endl;
>> return 0;
>> }
>>
>>
>> I've compiled the above with the following g++ flags:
>>
>> g++ -std=c++14 -g -O0 main.cpp
>>
>> and then run gdb on the resulting executable.
>>
>> When I step over using "next" I end up jumping back and forth, rather
>> than a simple linear top-down progression in the source code. I've
>> read that this is due to compiler optimizations, but as I've supplied
>> the flags -g and -O0, I do not believe this should happen.
>>
>> Is this a bug or am I doing something wrong?
>>
>> Best Regards,
>> Richard Szibele
>
> Hi Richard,
>
> You probably see this sequence:
>
> Temporary breakpoint 1, main () at test.cpp:6
> 6 auto ptr = std::shared_ptr<int>(new int);
> (gdb) n
> 7 *ptr = 100;
> (gdb) n
> 8 std::cout << *ptr << std::endl;
> (gdb) n
> 100
> 9 return 0;
> (gdb) n
> 6 auto ptr = std::shared_ptr<int>(new int);
> (gdb) n
> 10 }
>
> It's jumping back to the declaration of "ptr" just before exiting the
> scope of the main function. This can be surprising at first, but is
> perfectly normal given the implementation of next/step. The way step
> works is equivalent to this. The instruction you are stopped at
> currently belongs (was generated from) a particular source line. The
> step command executes instructions until it reaches an instruction
> that belongs to a different source line. next is the same except it
> doesn't go into function calls.
>
> The simple fact that there's a variable of type std::shared_ptr<int>
> declared in your scope means that the compiler must generate some code
> to call the destructor of that variable. This code is after the
> "return 0", and was generated from the declaration of ptr. That's why
> after "return 0" it jumps to "auto ptr = ...".
>
> You can look at the instructions generated by the compiler using
> "objdump -S a.out". For reference, here's what I get:
> https://pastebin.com/raw/rYPzbbeQ
>
> If you were to debug optimized code (you should give it a try), you'd
> see that it jumps in a much more erratic and unexplainable way.
>
> Simon
Hi Simon,
I'll need to look more into this, but this seems to be a wrapper
packaging issue on my system, as g++ outputs an identical binary
according to objdump with -g -O0 and -g -Ofast on my system.
-g -O0: https://pastebin.com/raw/4kW5LHq5
-g -Ofast: https://pastebin.com/raw/q7s0NjcW
Just for reference, this is the sequence I get:
Temporary breakpoint 1, main () at main.cpp:5
5 {
(gdb) n
6 auto ptr = std::shared_ptr<int>(new int);
(gdb) n
5 {
(gdb) n
6 auto ptr = std::shared_ptr<int>(new int);
(gdb) n
8 std::cout << *ptr << std::endl;
(gdb) n
6 auto ptr = std::shared_ptr<int>(new int);
(gdb) n
7 *ptr = 100;
(gdb) n
6 auto ptr = std::shared_ptr<int>(new int);
(gdb) n
8 std::cout << *ptr << std::endl;
(gdb) n
100
6 auto ptr = std::shared_ptr<int>(new int);
(gdb) n
10 }
Many thanks for your input.
Best Regards,
Richard Szibele
prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-04-23 18:28 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-04-22 23:06 Richard Szibele
2017-04-23 16:21 ` Simon Marchi
2017-04-23 18:28 ` Richard Szibele [this message]
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=b1e64bec-b0d9-f5fa-aa56-3bfb439b64e4@szibele.com \
--to=richard@szibele.com \
--cc=gdb@sourceware.org \
--cc=simon.marchi@polymtl.ca \
/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