From: Luis Machado <luis.machado@arm.com>
To: Tom de Vries <tdevries@suse.de>, gdb-patches@sourceware.org
Subject: Re: [committed][gdb/testsuite] Fix gdb.ada/access_tagged_param.exp for aarch64
Date: Wed, 7 Sep 2022 10:33:53 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <154fd7ff-9620-db1d-6469-38a6a08278b3@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220907092959.GA30111@delia>
On 9/7/22 10:30, Tom de Vries wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On aarch64-linux, I run into:
> ...
> Breakpoint 2, pck.inspect (obj=0x430eb0 \
> <system.pool_global.global_pool_object>, <objL>=0) at pck.adb:17^M
> 17 procedure Inspect (Obj: access Top_T'Class) is^M
> (gdb) FAIL: gdb.ada/access_tagged_param.exp: continue
> ...
> while on x86_64-linux, I see:
> ...
> Breakpoint 2, pck.inspect (obj=0x62b2a0, <objL>=2) at pck.adb:19^M
> 19 null;^M
> (gdb) PASS: gdb.ada/access_tagged_param.exp: continue
> ...
> Note the different line numbers, 17 vs 19.
>
> The difference comes from the gdbarch_skip_prologue implementation.
>
> The amd64_skip_prologue implementation doesn't use gcc line numbers, and falls
> back to the architecture-specific prologue analyzer, which correctly skips
> past the prologue, to address 0x4022f7:
> ...
> 00000000004022ec <pck__inspect>:
> 4022ec: 55 push %rbp
> 4022ed: 48 89 e5 mov %rsp,%rbp
> 4022f0: 48 89 7d f8 mov %rdi,-0x8(%rbp)
> 4022f4: 89 75 f4 mov %esi,-0xc(%rbp)
> 4022f7: 90 nop
> 4022f8: 90 nop
> 4022f9: 5d pop %rbp
> 4022fa: c3 ret
> ...
>
> The aarch64_skip_prologue implementation does use gcc line numbers, which are:
> ...
> File name Line number Starting address View Stmt
> pck.adb 17 0x402580 x
> pck.adb 17 0x402580 1 x
> pck.adb 19 0x40258c x
> pck.adb 20 0x402590 x
> ...
> and which are represented like this internally in gdb:
> ...
> INDEX LINE ADDRESS IS-STMT PROLOGUE-END
> 0 17 0x0000000000402580 Y
> 1 17 0x0000000000402580 Y
> 2 19 0x000000000040258c Y
> 3 20 0x0000000000402590 Y
> 4 END 0x00000000004025a0 Y
> ...
>
> The second entry is interpreted as end-of-prologue, so 0x402580 is used, while
> the actual end of the prologue is at 0x40258c:
> ...
> 0000000000402580 <pck__inspect>:
> 402580: d10043ff sub sp, sp, #0x10
> 402584: f90007e0 str x0, [sp, #8]
> 402588: b90007e1 str w1, [sp, #4]
> 40258c: d503201f nop
> 402590: d503201f nop
> 402594: 910043ff add sp, sp, #0x10
> 402598: d65f03c0 ret
> 40259c: d503201f nop
> ...
>
> Note that the architecture-specific prologue analyzer would have gotten this
> right:
> ...
> (gdb) p /x aarch64_analyze_prologue (gdbarch, pc, pc + 128, 0)
> $2 = 0x40258c
> ...
>
> Fix the FAIL by making the test-case more robust against problems in prologue
> skipping, by setting the breakpoint on line 19 instead.
>
> Likewise in a few similar test-cases.
>
> Tested on x86_64-linux and aarch64-linux.
>
> Committed to trunk.
>
> Thanks,
> - Tom
>
> [gdb/testsuite] Fix gdb.ada/access_tagged_param.exp for aarch64
>
> ---
> gdb/testsuite/gdb.ada/access_tagged_param.exp | 2 +-
> gdb/testsuite/gdb.ada/ptype_tagged_param.exp | 2 +-
> gdb/testsuite/gdb.ada/ref_param.exp | 2 +-
> 3 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/gdb/testsuite/gdb.ada/access_tagged_param.exp b/gdb/testsuite/gdb.ada/access_tagged_param.exp
> index 2b8e8ef172f..931c7fb12a9 100644
> --- a/gdb/testsuite/gdb.ada/access_tagged_param.exp
> +++ b/gdb/testsuite/gdb.ada/access_tagged_param.exp
> @@ -33,7 +33,7 @@ if ![runto "foo"] then {
> return
> }
>
> -gdb_breakpoint "pck.inspect"
> +gdb_breakpoint "pck.adb:19"
>
> # Continue until we reach the breakpoint, and verify that we can print
> # the value of all the parameters.
> diff --git a/gdb/testsuite/gdb.ada/ptype_tagged_param.exp b/gdb/testsuite/gdb.ada/ptype_tagged_param.exp
> index 0972e02a636..3a4a84a22ce 100644
> --- a/gdb/testsuite/gdb.ada/ptype_tagged_param.exp
> +++ b/gdb/testsuite/gdb.ada/ptype_tagged_param.exp
> @@ -27,7 +27,7 @@ set has_runtime_debug_info [gnat_runtime_has_debug_info]
>
> clean_restart ${testfile}
>
> -if ![runto "position_x" ] then {
> +if ![runto "pck.adb:20" ] then {
> return -1
> }
>
> diff --git a/gdb/testsuite/gdb.ada/ref_param.exp b/gdb/testsuite/gdb.ada/ref_param.exp
> index cbe0c065d34..56347932564 100644
> --- a/gdb/testsuite/gdb.ada/ref_param.exp
> +++ b/gdb/testsuite/gdb.ada/ref_param.exp
> @@ -25,7 +25,7 @@ if {[gdb_compile_ada "${srcfile}" "${binfile}" executable [list debug ]] != "" }
>
> clean_restart ${testfile}
>
> -if ![runto call_me] then {
> +if ![runto pck.adb:20] then {
> perror "Couldn't run ${testfile}"
> return
> }
Great! Thanks for the fixing this Tom.
prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-09-07 9:34 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-09-07 9:30 Tom de Vries
2022-09-07 9:33 ` Luis Machado [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=154fd7ff-9620-db1d-6469-38a6a08278b3@arm.com \
--to=luis.machado@arm.com \
--cc=gdb-patches@sourceware.org \
--cc=tdevries@suse.de \
/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;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).