From: Andreas Arnez <arnez@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: gdb-patches@sourceware.org
Subject: [PATCH] S390: Add use of unavailable-stack frame ID
Date: Mon, 07 Mar 2016 10:20:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <m31t7m37zm.fsf@oc1027705133.ibm.com> (raw)
When determining the frame ID of an inline frame, GDB currently asserts
that a valid ID of the underlying real frame is found, and that it does
not match outer_frame_id. From inline_frame_this_id():
/* For now, require we don't match outer_frame_id either (see
comment above). */
gdb_assert (!frame_id_eq (*this_id, outer_frame_id));
However, this assertion may fail when the real frame's unwinder can not
determine the frame ID. This happened on an s390x target with a binary
that lacked call frame information and also confused the prologue
analyzer, because then s390_frame_this_id() left the frame ID at its
default.
To fix this, this change enhances s390_frame_this_id such that an
unavailable-stack frame ID is built if no frame base can be determined
but the function address is available.
gdb/ChangeLog:
* s390-linux-tdep.c (s390_prologue_frame_unwind_cache): Store
frame func's PC in info->func before any other failure can occur.
(s390_frame_this_id): Use frame_id_build_unavailable_stack if
info->func has been filled out.
---
gdb/s390-linux-tdep.c | 16 +++++++++++-----
1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
diff --git a/gdb/s390-linux-tdep.c b/gdb/s390-linux-tdep.c
index 7f860b6..155bc66 100644
--- a/gdb/s390-linux-tdep.c
+++ b/gdb/s390-linux-tdep.c
@@ -2011,9 +2011,12 @@ s390_prologue_frame_unwind_cache (struct frame_info *this_frame,
bother searching for it -- with modern compilers this would be mostly
pointless anyway. Trust that we'll either have valid DWARF-2 CFI data
or else a valid backchain ... */
- func = get_frame_func (this_frame);
- if (!func)
- return 0;
+ if (!get_frame_func_if_available (this_frame, &info->func))
+ {
+ info->func = -1;
+ return 0;
+ }
+ func = info->func;
/* Try to analyze the prologue. */
result = s390_analyze_prologue (gdbarch, func,
@@ -2167,7 +2170,6 @@ s390_prologue_frame_unwind_cache (struct frame_info *this_frame,
info->local_base = prev_sp - size;
}
- info->func = func;
return 1;
}
@@ -2267,7 +2269,11 @@ s390_frame_this_id (struct frame_info *this_frame,
= s390_frame_unwind_cache (this_frame, this_prologue_cache);
if (info->frame_base == -1)
- return;
+ {
+ if (info->func != -1)
+ *this_id = frame_id_build_unavailable_stack (info->func);
+ return;
+ }
*this_id = frame_id_build (info->frame_base, info->func);
}
--
2.3.0
next reply other threads:[~2016-03-07 10:20 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-03-07 10:20 Andreas Arnez [this message]
2016-03-09 16:16 ` [PUSHED] " Andreas Arnez
2016-03-10 20:26 ` Pedro Alves
2016-03-11 9:24 ` Andreas Arnez
2016-03-15 8:12 ` Yao Qi
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=m31t7m37zm.fsf@oc1027705133.ibm.com \
--to=arnez@linux.vnet.ibm.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).