From: Tom Tromey <tom@tromey.com>
To: Simon Marchi via Gdb-patches <gdb-patches@sourceware.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] gdb/linux-nat: use LP's inferior when handling vfork done in linux_handle_extended_wait
Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2021 13:36:13 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87a6lmcv6a.fsf@tromey.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210812154823.966724-1-simon.marchi@polymtl.ca> (Simon Marchi via Gdb-patches's message of "Thu, 12 Aug 2021 11:48:23 -0400")
Simon> I spotted this bug by reading the code and subsequently wrote a test to
Simon> reproduce it. The bug is caught by the assertions that are added.
Simon> Otherwise the bug wouldn't cause a visible problem, but GDB would still
Simon> be in a wrong state.
This explanation is really great.
Simon> the bug explained above happens and waiting_for_vfork_done stays
Simon> wrongfully set, the assertion will fail when a different event.
The clause after the "," is missing some text, I guess something like
"when a different even is received".
Simon> If I run the test without the fix in linux-nat.c, I get:
Simon> run^M
Simon> Starting program: /home/simark/build/binutils-gdb/gdb/testsuite/outputs/gdb.base/vfork-multi-inferior/vfork-multi-inferior-vforker ^M
Simon> [Detaching after vfork from child process 822537]^M
Simon> /home/simark/src/binutils-gdb/gdb/infrun.c:5255: internal-error: void handle_inferior_event(execution_control_state*): Assertion `!inf->waiting_for_vfork_ done' failed.^M
Looks like some strange word wrapping in here, those spaces before the "done".
Simon> if (event == PTRACE_EVENT_VFORK_DONE)
Simon> {
Simon> - if (current_inferior ()->waiting_for_vfork_done)
Simon> + inferior *inf = find_inferior_ptid (linux_target, lp->ptid);
Simon> +
Simon> + if (inf->waiting_for_vfork_done)
I was curious about this and looked, and saw that this is the only use
of current_inferior in this function. A downside of our globals-based
approach is that it's hard to enforce a rule poisoning this kind of use
here. Oh well.
Simon> index 000000000000..cb3f3d6abd78
Simon> --- /dev/null
Simon> +++ b/gdb/testsuite/gdb.base/vfork-multi-inferior-other.c
Simon> @@ -0,0 +1,12 @@
Simon> +#include <unistd.h>
Simon> +
I think we normally are sticking the GPL comment in all new files.
Otherwise this all looks reasonable to me.
Tom
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-08-12 19:36 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-08-12 15:48 Simon Marchi
2021-08-12 19:36 ` Tom Tromey [this message]
2021-08-12 20:33 ` Simon Marchi
2021-08-18 21:05 ` Simon Marchi
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=87a6lmcv6a.fsf@tromey.com \
--to=tom@tromey.com \
--cc=gdb-patches@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;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).