Re: vdso handling

[Doug Evans <dje@google.com>]

On Wed, Mar 12, 2014 at 12:17 AM, Alan Modra <amodra@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 10, 2014 at 01:04:33PM +0000, Metzger, Markus T wrote:
>> I noticed that the BFD created for the VDSO (system-provided in-memory
>> DSO) does not contain any BFD sections.  Is this intentional?  Or has
>> there just been no need for them?
> [snip]
>> The vdso is processed in symbol_file_add_from_memory at
>> gdb/symfile-mem.c:84.  It calls bfd_from_remote_memory to create a BFD
>> for the vdso and then processes it.
>
> The underlying cause is that you're trying to debug an ELF binary that
> only contains the execution view.  The linking view (of which the
> sections are a part) is not loaded, so bfd_from_remote_memory does not
> have this information.  See elfcode.h bfd_from_remote_memory.
>
> You can see similar breakage of gdb and binutils if you zap e_shoff,
> e_shnum, and e_shstrndx of your favourite hello world program.
>
> I suppose one way to provide something that gdb and other tools expect
> would be to treat the vdso like a core file, and create fake sections
> corresponding to the program headers.  I'm not really keen on the idea
> though, since I know that will open up a can of worms.

I think a case can be made that gdb should be able to use the
"execution view" of the program here.
As for how to achieve that ... "Discuss." :-)