From: Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>
To: Tom de Vries <tdevries@suse.de>, gdb-patches@sourceware.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH][gdb/testsuite] Fix error message test in dw2-error.exp
Date: Tue, 03 Jul 2018 14:59:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <b11e84f4-5909-1757-bc90-e3aed7c9d287@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180619090024.c2yqabvk6oujs6dm@localhost.localdomain>
On 06/19/2018 10:00 AM, Tom de Vries wrote:
> the executable used in dw2-error.exp is compiled from a .s that was generated
> with dwarf2 debug information but has been hand-edited to set the version in
> the compilation unit header to 0x99:
> ...
> .Ldebug_info0:
> .long 0x4e # Length of Compilation Unit Info
> .value 0x99 # DWARF version number
> .long .Ldebug_abbrev0 # Offset Into Abbrev. Section
> ...
>
> Consequently, dwarf2read.c:read_comp_unit_head() interprets the compilation
> unit header as dwarf5,
That right there looks like the real bug to me.
I went looking for the history behind the testcase, and
got surprised that the testcase is expecting that "wrong unit_type in
compilation unit header" error instead of the same error that had been
reported in the original bug report at
<https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=14931>:
~~~~~
Dwarf Error: wrong version in compilation unit header (is 4, should be 2) [in module ....build/gdb/gdb]
~~~~~
read_and_check_comp_unit_head calls error_check_comp_unit_head
after calling read_comp_unit_head, and thus AFAICT error_check_comp_unit_head
would error out with the "wrong version" error, the one that had been
reported in the original bug report. That seems like a much better
error to me.
static void
error_check_comp_unit_head (struct dwarf2_per_objfile *dwarf2_per_objfile,
struct comp_unit_head *header,
struct dwarf2_section_info *section,
struct dwarf2_section_info *abbrev_section)
{
const char *filename = get_section_file_name (section);
if (header->version < 2 || header->version > 5)
error (_("Dwarf Error: wrong version in compilation unit header "
"(is %d, should be 2, 3, 4 or 5) [in module %s]"), header->version,
filename);
So it seems to me that read_comp_unit_head shouldn't be
trying to interpret contents of a dwarf version that
gdb doesn't understand. Seems like that error_check_comp_unit_head
version check is too late? How about moving it into
read_and_check_comp_unit_head? Of course, the testcase would then
be adjusted to expect the new message, and it would expect 153/0x99
exactly instead of any number, which ensures that gdb reads and
prints the version number correctly.
Thanks,
Pedro Alves
> which starts with fields unit_length (4 or 12 byte
> unsigned), version (uhalf), and unit_type (ubyte). So, the unit_type
> field is initialized from the first byte of .Ldebug_abbrev0 offset.
>
> Using objdump, we find that the value of that byte is 0x64.
> ...
> Contents of section .debug_info:
> ...
> 00c0 00450000 0001804e 00000099 00640000 .E.....N.....d..
> ...
>
> And indeed gdb errors out accordingly (note: 0x64 == 100):
> ...
> (gdb) file outputs/gdb.dwarf2/dw2-error/dw2-error
> Reading symbols from outputs/gdb.dwarf2/dw2-error/dw2-error...
> Dwarf Error: wrong unit_type in compilation unit header
> (is 100, should be 1 or 2)
> [in module outputs/gdb.dwarf2/dw2-error/dw2-error]
> (no debugging symbols found)...done.
> ...
>
> The test fails however because it expects the error message to contain 0
> instead of the 100 we're seeing.
>
> This patch fixes the failure by allowing any value for the unit_type in the
> error message.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-07-03 14:59 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-06-19 9:03 Tom de Vries
2018-07-03 14:21 ` [PING][PATCH][gdb/testsuite] " Tom de Vries
2018-07-03 14:59 ` Pedro Alves [this message]
2018-07-04 6:54 ` [PATCH][gdb/symtab] Fix version check in dwarf compilation unit header Tom de Vries
2018-07-04 9:36 ` Pedro Alves
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=b11e84f4-5909-1757-bc90-e3aed7c9d287@redhat.com \
--to=palves@redhat.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).