From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 2443 invoked by alias); 31 Dec 2014 07:22:45 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-prs-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-prs-owner@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 2383 invoked by uid 55); 31 Dec 2014 07:22:40 -0000 From: "cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org" To: gdb-prs@sourceware.org Subject: [Bug backtrace/16215] SPARC: can't compute CFA for this frame Date: Wed, 31 Dec 2014 07:22:00 -0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: gdb X-Bugzilla-Component: backtrace X-Bugzilla-Version: 7.6 X-Bugzilla-Keywords: X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal X-Bugzilla-Who: cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW X-Bugzilla-Priority: P2 X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at sourceware dot org X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: --- X-Bugzilla-Flags: X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Bugzilla-URL: http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated MIME-Version: 1.0 X-SW-Source: 2014-q4/txt/msg00475.txt.bz2 https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16215 --- Comment #9 from cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org --- This is an automated email from the git hooks/post-receive script. It was generated because a ref change was pushed to the repository containing the project "gdb and binutils". The branch, gdb-7.8-branch has been updated via ec95c61a84a69b706714793a15bda0c5801b6db9 (commit) from f0df25af07d11fcb5bd3c861eac6d6a82432b22e (commit) Those revisions listed above that are new to this repository have not appeared on any other notification email; so we list those revisions in full, below. - Log ----------------------------------------------------------------- https://sourceware.org/git/gitweb.cgi?p=binutils-gdb.git;h=ec95c61a84a69b706714793a15bda0c5801b6db9 commit ec95c61a84a69b706714793a15bda0c5801b6db9 Author: Joel Brobecker Date: Fri Nov 21 04:59:35 2014 +0100 Lift DWARF unwinder restriction in dwarf2-frame.c::dwarf2_frame_cfa GDB is currently broken on all SPARC targets when using GCC 4.9. When trying to print any local variable: (gdb) p x can't compute CFA for this frame This is related to the fact that the compiler now generates DWARF 4 debugging info by default, and in particular that it now emits DW_OP_call_frame_cfa, which triggers a limitation in dwarf2_frame_cfa: /* This restriction could be lifted if other unwinders are known to compute the frame base in a way compatible with the DWARF unwinder. */ if (!frame_unwinder_is (this_frame, &dwarf2_frame_unwind) && !frame_unwinder_is (this_frame, &dwarf2_tailcall_frame_unwind)) error (_("can't compute CFA for this frame")); We couldn't append the dwarf2 unwinder to all SPARC targets because it does not work properly with StackGhost: https://www.sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2014-07/msg00012.html We also later discovered that using the DWARF2 unwinder means using it for computing the function's return address, which is buggy when it comes to functions returning a struct (where the return address is saved-pc+12 instead of saved-pc+8). This is because GCC is emitting the info about the return address as %o7/%i7 instead of the actual return address. For functions that have debugging info, we compensate by looking at the function's return type and add the extra +4, but for function without debug info, we're stuck. EricB and I twisted the issue in all the directions we could think of, and unfortunately couldn't find a way to make it work without introduction one regression or another. But, stepping back a little, just removing the restriction seems to work well for us on all both sparc-elf and {sparc,sparc64}-solaris. After reviewing the previous discussions about this test, I could not figure out whether some unwinders were already known to have incompatible CFAs or if the concern was purely theoretical: https://www.sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2009-06/msg00191.html https://www.sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2009-07/msg00570.html https://www.sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2009-09/msg00027.html At the moment, we took the approach of trying it out, and see what happens... gdb/ChangeLog: PR backtrace/16215: * dwarf2-frame.c (dwarf2_frame_cfa): Remove the restriction the frame unwinder must either be the dwarf2_frame_unwind or the dwarf2_tailcall_frame_unwind. Verify that this_frame's stack_addr is valid before calling get_frame_base. Throw an error if not valid. Tested on sparc-solaris and sparc-elf with AdaCore's testsuite (the FSF testsuite crashes all of AdaCore's solaris machines). ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Summary of changes: gdb/ChangeLog | 9 +++++++++ gdb/dwarf2-frame.c | 12 ++++++------ 2 files changed, 15 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.