* [Bug gdb/17384] android arm gdb "Cannot access memory at address" when I "stepi" over "blx"
2014-09-12 13:38 [Bug gdb/17384] New: android arm gdb "Cannot access memory at address" when I "stepi" over "blx" martin at minimum dot se
@ 2014-09-16 8:48 ` martin at minimum dot se
2014-09-16 9:03 ` palves at redhat dot com
` (25 subsequent siblings)
26 siblings, 0 replies; 28+ messages in thread
From: martin at minimum dot se @ 2014-09-16 8:48 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gdb-prs
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17384
--- Comment #1 from molsson <martin at minimum dot se> ---
(gdb) disassemble /r $pc,+10
Dump of assembler code from 0x4def62a4 to 0x4def62ae:
=> 0x4def62a4
<blink::RenderFullScreen::createPlaceholder(WTF::PassRefPtr<blink::RenderStyle>,
blink::LayoutRect const&)+12>: b8 68 ldr r0, [r7, #8]
0x4def62a6
<blink::RenderFullScreen::createPlaceholder(WTF::PassRefPtr<blink::RenderStyle>,
blink::LayoutRect const&)+14>: e6 f1 bc ec blx 0x4e0dcc20
0x4def62aa
<blink::RenderFullScreen::createPlaceholder(WTF::PassRefPtr<blink::RenderStyle>,
blink::LayoutRect const&)+18>: 03 46 mov r3, r0
0x4def62ac
<blink::RenderFullScreen::createPlaceholder(WTF::PassRefPtr<blink::RenderStyle>,
blink::LayoutRect const&)+20>: 18 46 mov r0, r3
End of assembler dump.
(gdb) disassemble /r 0x4e0dcc20,+10
Dump of assembler code from 0x4e0dcc20 to 0x4e0dcc2a:
0x4e0dcc20: 04 c0 9f e5 ldr r12, [pc, #4] ; 0x4e0dcc2c
0x4e0dcc24: 0c c0 8f e0 add r12, pc, r12
0x4e0dcc28: 1c ff 2f e1 bx r12
End of assembler dump.
When "stepi" runs the "blx 0x4e0dcc20" a call is made to
thumb_get_next_pc_raw() and in there we enter the branch:
else if (thumb_insn_size (inst1) == 4) /* 32-bit instruction */
...and continue into the branch:
if ((inst1 & 0xf800) == 0xf000 && (inst2 & 0x8000) == 0x8000)
...and continue into the branch for B, BL, BLX etc:
if ((inst2 & 0x1000) != 0 || (inst2 & 0xd001) == 0xc000)
...and in the end of thumb_get_next_pc_raw() nextpc will be 0x4e0dcc20 just
like expected. So basically the thumb_get_next_pc_raw() part seems to work well
and this bug might not be that similar to the other bugfix mentioned on
stackoverflow (see gerrit link on stackoverflow page).
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 28+ messages in thread* [Bug gdb/17384] android arm gdb "Cannot access memory at address" when I "stepi" over "blx"
2014-09-12 13:38 [Bug gdb/17384] New: android arm gdb "Cannot access memory at address" when I "stepi" over "blx" martin at minimum dot se
2014-09-16 8:48 ` [Bug gdb/17384] " martin at minimum dot se
@ 2014-09-16 9:03 ` palves at redhat dot com
2014-09-16 9:16 ` palves at redhat dot com
` (24 subsequent siblings)
26 siblings, 0 replies; 28+ messages in thread
From: palves at redhat dot com @ 2014-09-16 9:03 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gdb-prs
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17384
Pedro Alves <palves at redhat dot com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |palves at redhat dot com
--- Comment #2 from Pedro Alves <palves at redhat dot com> ---
Pasting "http://temp.minimum.se/bt_for_memory_error.txt" here, for easier
reference, and so we're protected against that resource disappearing in the
future:
#0 memory_error_message (err=err@entry=TARGET_XFER_E_IO, gdbarch=0x1ed4cc0,
memaddr=memaddr@entry=1) at corefile.c:196
#1 0x000000000058bd1d in memory_error (err=TARGET_XFER_E_IO,
memaddr=memaddr@entry=1) at corefile.c:224
#2 0x000000000058be11 in read_memory (memaddr=1,
myaddr=myaddr@entry=0x7fff5dee86d0 "\377\200\203R", len=len@entry=4) at
corefile.c:261
#3 0x000000000058bec5 in read_memory_integer (memaddr=<optimized out>, len=4,
byte_order=BFD_ENDIAN_LITTLE) at corefile.c:357
#4 0x000000000058bf02 in do_captured_read_memory_integer
(data=data@entry=0x7fff5dee8770) at corefile.c:322
#5 0x0000000000513225 in catch_errors (func=func@entry=0x58bef0
<do_captured_read_memory_integer>, func_args=func_args@entry=0x7fff5dee8770,
errstring=errstring@entry=0x6c20cd "", mask=mask@entry=RETURN_MASK_ALL) at
exceptions.c:237
#6 0x000000000058be8b in safe_read_memory_integer (memaddr=<optimized out>,
len=len@entry=4, byte_order=byte_order@entry=BFD_ENDIAN_LITTLE,
return_value=return_value@entry=0x7fff5dee87b8) at corefile.c:343
#7 0x000000000041122a in arm_scan_prologue (cache=0x1e51ec0,
this_frame=0x1e51e00) at arm-tdep.c:1996
#8 arm_make_prologue_cache (this_frame=0x1e51e00) at arm-tdep.c:2022
#9 0x000000000041142a in arm_prologue_this_id (this_frame=0x1e51e00,
this_cache=0x1e51e18, this_id=0x1e51e60) at arm-tdep.c:2052
#10 0x00000000005e4ea4 in compute_frame_id (fi=0x1e51e00) at frame.c:459
#11 get_prev_frame_if_no_cycle (this_frame=this_frame@entry=0x1e51470) at
frame.c:1781
#12 0x00000000005e72ca in get_prev_frame_always_1 (this_frame=0x1e51470) at
frame.c:1955
#13 get_prev_frame_always (this_frame=0x1e51470) at frame.c:1972
#14 0x00000000005e7754 in frame_unwind_caller_id (next_frame=<optimized out>)
at frame.c:500
#15 0x0000000000503a07 in process_event_stop_test
(ecs=ecs@entry=0x7fff5dee9070) at infrun.c:4738
#16 0x0000000000505478 in handle_inferior_event (ecs=0x7fff5dee9070) at
infrun.c:3424
#17 0x00000000005079ba in fetch_inferior_event
(client_data=client_data@entry=0x0) at infrun.c:2899
#18 0x000000000051dc73 in inferior_event_handler (event_type=INF_REG_EVENT,
client_data=0x0) at inf-loop.c:58
#19 0x0000000000428fce in run_async_handler_and_reschedule (scb=0x1ec5600) at
ser-base.c:137
#20 0x000000000051bf73 in process_event () at event-loop.c:340
#21 0x000000000051c2c7 in gdb_do_one_event () at event-loop.c:404
#22 0x000000000051c4e7 in start_event_loop () at event-loop.c:429
#23 0x0000000000515b73 in captured_command_loop (data=data@entry=0x0) at
main.c:322
#24 0x0000000000513225 in catch_errors (func=func@entry=0x515b60
<captured_command_loop>, func_args=func_args@entry=0x0,
errstring=errstring@entry=0x6c20cd "", mask=mask@entry=RETURN_MASK_ALL) at
exceptions.c:237
#25 0x0000000000516a76 in captured_main (data=data@entry=0x7fff5dee93c0) at
main.c:1142
#26 0x0000000000513225 in catch_errors (func=func@entry=0x516060
<captured_main>, func_args=func_args@entry=0x7fff5dee93c0,
errstring=errstring@entry=0x6c20cd "", mask=mask@entry=RETURN_MASK_ALL) at
exceptions.c:237
#27 0x0000000000516f1b in gdb_main (args=args@entry=0x7fff5dee93c0) at
main.c:1150
#28 0x0000000000407b65 in main (argc=<optimized out>, argv=<optimized out>) at
gdb.c:32
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 28+ messages in thread* [Bug gdb/17384] android arm gdb "Cannot access memory at address" when I "stepi" over "blx"
2014-09-12 13:38 [Bug gdb/17384] New: android arm gdb "Cannot access memory at address" when I "stepi" over "blx" martin at minimum dot se
2014-09-16 8:48 ` [Bug gdb/17384] " martin at minimum dot se
2014-09-16 9:03 ` palves at redhat dot com
@ 2014-09-16 9:16 ` palves at redhat dot com
2014-09-16 13:41 ` martin at minimum dot se
` (23 subsequent siblings)
26 siblings, 0 replies; 28+ messages in thread
From: palves at redhat dot com @ 2014-09-16 9:16 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gdb-prs
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17384
--- Comment #3 from Pedro Alves <palves at redhat dot com> ---
I'm not exactly sure what's going on here, but the backtrace shows a memory
read coming from the prologue scanner, triggered probably from the code that
tries to determine whether the program stepped into a function:
#2 0x000000000058be11 in read_memory (memaddr=1,
...
#5 0x0000000000513225 in catch_errors (func=func@entry=0x58bef0
...
#6 0x000000000058be8b in safe_read_memory_integer (memaddr=<optimized out>,
#7 0x000000000041122a in arm_scan_prologue (cache=0x1e51ec0,
#8 arm_make_prologue_cache (this_frame=0x1e51e00) at arm-tdep.c:2022
...
#12 0x00000000005e72ca in get_prev_frame_always_1 (this_frame=0x1e51470) at
frame.c:1955
...
#15 0x0000000000503a07 in process_event_stop_test
(ecs=ecs@entry=0x7fff5dee9070) at infrun.c:4738
So it kind of sounds like either the program's stack really is corrupted, or,
GDB's heuristic prologue scanner gets this prologue wrong.
But the thing is that error you've shown is caught and swallowed (frames
#5/#6),
so it looks like this particular memory_error call can't result in the user
visible error. There's probably another one after if you let GDB continue.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 28+ messages in thread* [Bug gdb/17384] android arm gdb "Cannot access memory at address" when I "stepi" over "blx"
2014-09-12 13:38 [Bug gdb/17384] New: android arm gdb "Cannot access memory at address" when I "stepi" over "blx" martin at minimum dot se
` (2 preceding siblings ...)
2014-09-16 9:16 ` palves at redhat dot com
@ 2014-09-16 13:41 ` martin at minimum dot se
2014-09-16 13:46 ` martin at minimum dot se
` (22 subsequent siblings)
26 siblings, 0 replies; 28+ messages in thread
From: martin at minimum dot se @ 2014-09-16 13:41 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gdb-prs
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17384
--- Comment #4 from molsson <martin at minimum dot se> ---
You're right, there was infact 5 calls to memory_error() during the relevant
"stepi" and it was only after I "continue" past the 5th one that the error is
printed. The bt to that last memory_error() call is:
#0 read_memory (memaddr=1, myaddr=0x7ffff71ed760 <incomplete sequence \360>,
len=4) at corefile.c:247
#1 0x000000000060a81e in read_memory_integer (memaddr=1, len=4,
byte_order=BFD_ENDIAN_LITTLE) at corefile.c:357
#2 0x000000000060a774 in do_captured_read_memory_integer (data=0x7ffff71ed850)
at corefile.c:322
#3 0x0000000000564fae in catch_errors (func=0x60a72d
<do_captured_read_memory_integer>, func_args=0x7ffff71ed850, errstring=0x848451
"", mask=RETURN_MASK_ALL) at exceptions.c:237
#4 0x000000000060a7cb in safe_read_memory_integer (memaddr=1, len=4,
byte_order=BFD_ENDIAN_LITTLE, return_value=0x7ffff71ed8d0) at corefile.c:343
#5 0x000000000040e07c in arm_scan_prologue (this_frame=0x301f6c90,
cache=0x301f6d50) at arm-tdep.c:1996
#6 0x000000000040e141 in arm_make_prologue_cache (this_frame=0x301f6c90) at
arm-tdep.c:2022
#7 0x000000000040e230 in arm_prologue_this_id (this_frame=0x301f6c90,
this_cache=0x301f6ca8, this_id=0x301f6cf0) at arm-tdep.c:2052
#8 0x00000000006870ce in compute_frame_id (fi=0x301f6c90) at frame.c:459
#9 0x0000000000689b2e in get_prev_frame_if_no_cycle (this_frame=0x301f6300) at
frame.c:1781
#10 0x000000000068a1c5 in get_prev_frame_always_1 (this_frame=0x301f6300) at
frame.c:1955
#11 0x000000000068a215 in get_prev_frame_always (this_frame=0x301f6300) at
frame.c:1972
#12 0x000000000068728f in frame_unwind_caller_id (next_frame=0x301f6300) at
frame.c:500
#13 0x0000000000553be1 in process_event_stop_test (ecs=0x7ffff71ee0e0) at
infrun.c:4738
#14 0x0000000000553016 in handle_signal_stop (ecs=0x7ffff71ee0e0) at
infrun.c:4304
#15 0x0000000000552041 in handle_inferior_event (ecs=0x7ffff71ee0e0) at
infrun.c:3797
#16 0x000000000055051d in fetch_inferior_event (client_data=0x0) at
infrun.c:2899
#17 0x0000000000572a6e in inferior_event_handler (event_type=INF_REG_EVENT,
client_data=0x0) at inf-loop.c:58
#18 0x000000000044e435 in remote_async_serial_handler (scb=0x1d2c610,
context=0x1c46b90) at remote.c:11586
#19 0x0000000000436aba in run_async_handler_and_reschedule (scb=0x1d2c610) at
ser-base.c:137
#20 0x0000000000436b8a in fd_event (error=0, context=0x1d2c610) at
ser-base.c:182
#21 0x000000000057086f in handle_file_event (data=...) at event-loop.c:763
#22 0x000000000056fd44 in process_event () at event-loop.c:340
#23 0x000000000056fe0b in gdb_do_one_event () at event-loop.c:404
#24 0x000000000056fe5b in start_event_loop () at event-loop.c:429
#25 0x00000000005718d6 in cli_command_loop (data=0x0) at event-top.c:182
#26 0x00000000005681cd in current_interp_command_loop () at interps.c:318
#27 0x0000000000568d79 in captured_command_loop (data=0x0) at main.c:322
#28 0x0000000000564fae in catch_errors (func=0x568d5e <captured_command_loop>,
func_args=0x0, errstring=0x81a8f5 "", mask=RETURN_MASK_ALL) at exceptions.c:237
#29 0x000000000056a21e in captured_main (data=0x7ffff71ee560) at main.c:1142
#30 0x0000000000564fae in catch_errors (func=0x569153 <captured_main>,
func_args=0x7ffff71ee560, errstring=0x81a8f5 "", mask=RETURN_MASK_ALL) at
exceptions.c:237
#31 0x000000000056a247 in gdb_main (args=0x7ffff71ee560) at main.c:1150
#32 0x00000000004062cd in main (argc=3, argv=0x7ffff71ee668) at gdb.c:32
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 28+ messages in thread* [Bug gdb/17384] android arm gdb "Cannot access memory at address" when I "stepi" over "blx"
2014-09-12 13:38 [Bug gdb/17384] New: android arm gdb "Cannot access memory at address" when I "stepi" over "blx" martin at minimum dot se
` (3 preceding siblings ...)
2014-09-16 13:41 ` martin at minimum dot se
@ 2014-09-16 13:46 ` martin at minimum dot se
2014-09-16 15:10 ` palves at redhat dot com
` (21 subsequent siblings)
26 siblings, 0 replies; 28+ messages in thread
From: martin at minimum dot se @ 2014-09-16 13:46 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gdb-prs
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17384
--- Comment #5 from molsson <martin at minimum dot se> ---
Sorry that last comment didn't make a lot of sense, I used the wrong
breakpoint.
If I put a breakpoint on memory_error_message() instead, which is the function
that prints the actual error. Then I get one hit only, and from this stack:
#0 memory_error_message (err=TARGET_XFER_E_IO, gdbarch=0x25a8a50, memaddr=1)
at corefile.c:197
#1 0x000000000060a56c in memory_error (err=TARGET_XFER_E_IO, memaddr=1) at
corefile.c:224
#2 0x000000000060a65a in read_memory (memaddr=1, myaddr=0x7fffcfde1b90
<incomplete sequence \360>, len=4) at corefile.c:261
#3 0x000000000060a81e in read_memory_integer (memaddr=1, len=4,
byte_order=BFD_ENDIAN_LITTLE) at corefile.c:357
#4 0x000000000060a774 in do_captured_read_memory_integer (data=0x7fffcfde1c80)
at corefile.c:322
#5 0x0000000000564fae in catch_errors (func=0x60a72d
<do_captured_read_memory_integer>, func_args=0x7fffcfde1c80, errstring=0x848451
"", mask=RETURN_MASK_ALL) at exceptions.c:237
#6 0x000000000060a7cb in safe_read_memory_integer (memaddr=1, len=4,
byte_order=BFD_ENDIAN_LITTLE, return_value=0x7fffcfde1d00) at corefile.c:343
#7 0x000000000040e07c in arm_scan_prologue (this_frame=0x30a79ad0,
cache=0x30a79b90) at arm-tdep.c:1996
#8 0x000000000040e141 in arm_make_prologue_cache (this_frame=0x30a79ad0) at
arm-tdep.c:2022
#9 0x000000000040e230 in arm_prologue_this_id (this_frame=0x30a79ad0,
this_cache=0x30a79ae8, this_id=0x30a79b30) at arm-tdep.c:2052
#10 0x00000000006870ce in compute_frame_id (fi=0x30a79ad0) at frame.c:459
#11 0x0000000000689b2e in get_prev_frame_if_no_cycle (this_frame=0x30a79140) at
frame.c:1781
#12 0x000000000068a1c5 in get_prev_frame_always_1 (this_frame=0x30a79140) at
frame.c:1955
#13 0x000000000068a215 in get_prev_frame_always (this_frame=0x30a79140) at
frame.c:1972
#14 0x000000000068728f in frame_unwind_caller_id (next_frame=0x30a79140) at
frame.c:500
#15 0x0000000000553be1 in process_event_stop_test (ecs=0x7fffcfde2510) at
infrun.c:4738
#16 0x0000000000553016 in handle_signal_stop (ecs=0x7fffcfde2510) at
infrun.c:4304
#17 0x0000000000552041 in handle_inferior_event (ecs=0x7fffcfde2510) at
infrun.c:3797
#18 0x000000000055051d in fetch_inferior_event (client_data=0x0) at
infrun.c:2899
#19 0x0000000000572a6e in inferior_event_handler (event_type=INF_REG_EVENT,
client_data=0x0) at inf-loop.c:58
#20 0x000000000044e435 in remote_async_serial_handler (scb=0x259e610,
context=0x24b8b90) at remote.c:11586
#21 0x0000000000436aba in run_async_handler_and_reschedule (scb=0x259e610) at
ser-base.c:137
#22 0x0000000000436b8a in fd_event (error=0, context=0x259e610) at
ser-base.c:182
#23 0x000000000057086f in handle_file_event (data=...) at event-loop.c:763
#24 0x000000000056fd44 in process_event () at event-loop.c:340
#25 0x000000000056fe0b in gdb_do_one_event () at event-loop.c:404
#26 0x000000000056fe5b in start_event_loop () at event-loop.c:429
#27 0x00000000005718d6 in cli_command_loop (data=0x0) at event-top.c:182
#28 0x00000000005681cd in current_interp_command_loop () at interps.c:318
#29 0x0000000000568d79 in captured_command_loop (data=0x0) at main.c:322
#30 0x0000000000564fae in catch_errors (func=0x568d5e <captured_command_loop>,
func_args=0x0, errstring=0x81a8f5 "", mask=RETURN_MASK_ALL) at exceptions.c:237
#31 0x000000000056a21e in captured_main (data=0x7fffcfde2990) at main.c:1142
#32 0x0000000000564fae in catch_errors (func=0x569153 <captured_main>,
func_args=0x7fffcfde2990, errstring=0x81a8f5 "", mask=RETURN_MASK_ALL) at
exceptions.c:237
#33 0x000000000056a247 in gdb_main (args=0x7fffcfde2990) at main.c:1150
#34 0x00000000004062cd in main (argc=3, argv=0x7fffcfde2a98) at gdb.c:32
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 28+ messages in thread* [Bug gdb/17384] android arm gdb "Cannot access memory at address" when I "stepi" over "blx"
2014-09-12 13:38 [Bug gdb/17384] New: android arm gdb "Cannot access memory at address" when I "stepi" over "blx" martin at minimum dot se
` (4 preceding siblings ...)
2014-09-16 13:46 ` martin at minimum dot se
@ 2014-09-16 15:10 ` palves at redhat dot com
2014-09-17 7:57 ` martin at minimum dot se
` (20 subsequent siblings)
26 siblings, 0 replies; 28+ messages in thread
From: palves at redhat dot com @ 2014-09-16 15:10 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gdb-prs
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17384
--- Comment #6 from Pedro Alves <palves at redhat dot com> ---
> If I put a breakpoint on memory_error_message() instead, which is the function
> that prints the actual error. Then I get one hit only, and from this stack:
That doesn't print the error, it only builds the error string.
But I see where it's printed:
#5 0x0000000000564fae in catch_errors (func=0x60a72d
<do_captured_read_memory_integer>, func_args=0x7fffcfde1c80, errstring=0x848451
"", mask=RETURN_MASK_ALL) at exceptions.c:237
#6 0x000000000060a7cb in safe_read_memory_integer (memaddr=1, len=4,
byte_order=BFD_ENDIAN_LITTLE, return_value=0x7fffcfde1d00) at corefile.c:343
It's catch_errors itself:
int
catch_errors (catch_errors_ftype *func, void *func_args, char *errstring,
return_mask mask)
{
...
exception_fprintf (gdb_stderr, exception, "%s", errstring);
if (exception.reason != 0)
return 0;
return val;
}
Eh, that's unexpected.
This means that safe_read_memory_integer is not silent on error. This seems
bogus to me. It should probably be using catch_exceptions instead.
Of course, that still doesn't explain why we try to read address 0x1 in the
first place.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 28+ messages in thread* [Bug gdb/17384] android arm gdb "Cannot access memory at address" when I "stepi" over "blx"
2014-09-12 13:38 [Bug gdb/17384] New: android arm gdb "Cannot access memory at address" when I "stepi" over "blx" martin at minimum dot se
` (5 preceding siblings ...)
2014-09-16 15:10 ` palves at redhat dot com
@ 2014-09-17 7:57 ` martin at minimum dot se
2014-09-17 9:45 ` martin at minimum dot se
` (19 subsequent siblings)
26 siblings, 0 replies; 28+ messages in thread
From: martin at minimum dot se @ 2014-09-17 7:57 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gdb-prs
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17384
--- Comment #7 from molsson <martin at minimum dot se> ---
Created attachment 7791
--> https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=7791&action=edit
use catch_exceptions() instead of catch_errors()
FWIW, if I switch catch_errors() to catch_exceptions() using the attached
patch, then I still get the error printed, this time via:
#0 fputs_maybe_filtered (linebuffer=0x146d710 "\n", stream=0x111d1e0,
filter=1) at utils.c:2149
#1 0x0000000000682a44 in vfprintf_maybe_filtered (stream=0x111d1e0,
format=0x819661 "\n", args=0x7fff5473a6c8, filter=1) at utils.c:2303
#2 0x0000000000682a7f in vfprintf_filtered (stream=0x111d1e0, format=0x819661
"\n", args=0x7fff5473a6c8) at utils.c:2311
#3 0x0000000000682caa in fprintf_filtered (stream=0x111d1e0, format=0x819661
"\n") at utils.c:2363
#4 0x0000000000564be6 in print_exception (file=0x111d1e0, e=...) at
exceptions.c:93
#5 0x0000000000564c6f in exception_print (file=0x111d1e0, e=...) at
exceptions.c:116
#6 0x0000000000564e74 in catch_exceptions_with_msg (func_uiout=0x1119830,
func=0x60a6fd <do_captured_read_memory_integer>, func_args=0x7fff5473a8e0,
gdberrmsg=0x0, mask=RETURN_MASK_ALL) at exceptions.c:202
#7 0x0000000000564d8d in catch_exceptions (uiout=0x1119830, func=0x60a6fd
<do_captured_read_memory_integer>, func_args=0x7fff5473a8e0,
mask=RETURN_MASK_ALL) at exceptions.c:169
#8 0x000000000060a7a1 in safe_read_memory_integer (memaddr=1, len=4,
byte_order=BFD_ENDIAN_LITTLE, return_value=0x7fff5473a960) at corefile.c:343
#9 0x000000000040e07c in arm_scan_prologue (this_frame=0x10f6d90,
cache=0x10f6e50) at arm-tdep.c:1996
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 28+ messages in thread* [Bug gdb/17384] android arm gdb "Cannot access memory at address" when I "stepi" over "blx"
2014-09-12 13:38 [Bug gdb/17384] New: android arm gdb "Cannot access memory at address" when I "stepi" over "blx" martin at minimum dot se
` (6 preceding siblings ...)
2014-09-17 7:57 ` martin at minimum dot se
@ 2014-09-17 9:45 ` martin at minimum dot se
2014-09-17 10:20 ` palves at redhat dot com
` (18 subsequent siblings)
26 siblings, 0 replies; 28+ messages in thread
From: martin at minimum dot se @ 2014-09-17 9:45 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gdb-prs
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17384
--- Comment #8 from molsson <martin at minimum dot se> ---
On the topic of "why is it reading from 0x1 in the first place", the code says:
/* We have no symbol information. Our only option is to assume this
function has a standard stack frame and the normal frame register.
Then, we can find the value of our frame pointer on entrance to
the callee (or at the present moment if this is the innermost frame).
The value stored there should be the address of the stmfd + 8. */
CORE_ADDR frame_loc;
LONGEST return_value;
frame_loc = get_frame_register_unsigned (this_frame, ARM_FP_REGNUM);
if (!safe_read_memory_integer (frame_loc, 4, byte_order, &return_value))
It should be noted that I have symbols loaded for my own app but I don't have
debugging info loaded for the android libraries (this is not an AOSP phone so
for android .so files I have only the regular exported symbols and not full
debug info). My "info sharedlibaries" look like this:
http://temp.minimum.se/sharedlibs.txt
The android system library .so files have been copied from the android device
into /tmp/adb_gdb_libs_armv7/system/* host-side.
Also, I noted that if I put a breakpoint on
"blink::RenderFullScreen::createPlaceholder" and then just do "bt" when the
breakpoint hits, then it prints the same error after the bt is printed (so this
has nothing to do with next/stepi specifically), like this:
...
#29 0x49bb355c in base::MessageLoop::Run (this=0x51406720) at
../../base/message_loop/message_loop.cc:308
#30 0x4ba00aac in content::RendererMain (parameters=...) at
../../content/renderer/renderer_main.cc:227
#31 0x4b28b3d8 in content::RunNamedProcessTypeMain (process_type=...,
main_function_params=..., delegate=0x512f8750) at
../../content/app/content_main_runner.cc:486
#32 0x4b28bc00 in content::ContentMainRunnerImpl::Run (this=0x51409648) at
../../content/app/content_main_runner.cc:882
#33 0x4b2878aa in content::Start (Cannot access memory at address 0x1
env=0x512fc418, clazz=0x51406aec) at
../../content/app/android/content_main.cc:48
#34 0x48ee5c50 in ?? ()
Cannot access memory at address 0x1
Backtrace stopped: previous frame identical to this frame (corrupt stack?)
If I reformat my phone and install AOSP on it instead of the non-rooted
production build I was using earlier, then if I run "bt" at the same breakpoint
I see this:
#29 0x7624855c in base::MessageLoop::Run (this=0x7d9c7730) at
../../base/message_loop/message_loop.cc:308
#30 0x77fc3aac in content::RendererMain (parameters=...) at
../../content/renderer/renderer_main.cc:227
#31 0x7784e3d8 in content::RunNamedProcessTypeMain (process_type=...,
main_function_params=..., delegate=0x7d8be550) at
../../content/app/content_main_runner.cc:486
#32 0x7784ec00 in content::ContentMainRunnerImpl::Run (this=0x7db542f0) at
../../content/app/content_main_runner.cc:882
#33 0x7784a8aa in content::Start (env=0x7d8c0980, clazz=0x2f400001) at
../../content/app/android/content_main.cc:48
#34 0x414f5bd0 in dvmPlatformInvoke () from
/tmp/adb_gdb_libs_armv7/system/lib/libdvm.so
#35 0x41526126 in dvmCallJNIMethod(unsigned int const*, JValue*, Method const*,
Thread*) () from /tmp/adb_gdb_libs_armv7/system/lib/libdvm.so
#36 0x41510828 in dvmCheckCallJNIMethod(unsigned int const*, JValue*, Method
const*, Thread*) () from /tmp/adb_gdb_libs_armv7/system/lib/libdvm.so
#37 0x414fefe4 in dvmJitToInterpNoChain () from
/tmp/adb_gdb_libs_armv7/system/lib/libdvm.so
Backtrace stopped: previous frame identical to this frame (corrupt stack?)
(gdb)
...so when running AOSP I do _not_ get the error, but gdb still fails to
understand the end of the stacktrace. FWIW, when running AOSP my "info
sharedlibaries" looks like this:
http://temp.minimum.se/sharedlibraries_aosp.txt
...i.e. I still have that *-marker on all the android system libraries. I don't
know if the default AOSP build adds -g or if it just builds with
exported-symbols-only anyway.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 28+ messages in thread* [Bug gdb/17384] android arm gdb "Cannot access memory at address" when I "stepi" over "blx"
2014-09-12 13:38 [Bug gdb/17384] New: android arm gdb "Cannot access memory at address" when I "stepi" over "blx" martin at minimum dot se
` (7 preceding siblings ...)
2014-09-17 9:45 ` martin at minimum dot se
@ 2014-09-17 10:20 ` palves at redhat dot com
2014-09-17 11:23 ` martin at minimum dot se
` (17 subsequent siblings)
26 siblings, 0 replies; 28+ messages in thread
From: palves at redhat dot com @ 2014-09-17 10:20 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gdb-prs
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17384
--- Comment #9 from Pedro Alves <palves at redhat dot com> ---
> Also, I noted that if I put a breakpoint on
> "blink::RenderFullScreen::createPlaceholder" and then just do "bt" when the
> breakpoint hits, then it prints the same error after the bt is printed (so
> this has nothing to do with next/stepi specifically) (...)
Yeah, this is an issue in the unwinder, which next/step use internally to
detect when the program stepped into a function. "bt" is the most direct way
to trigger the unwinder.
If you have no (dwarf) debug/unwind info available, then GDB's fallback
heuristic unwinders kick in, which, being heuristic can fail to unwind in
presence of clever compiler optimizations that end up generating
frames/prologues that gdb might not grok, etc. Sometimes we may be able to
improve the heuristics, often times, we won't, and debug info is the only
salvation.
First, IMO, safe_read_memory_integer shouldn't ever print the error. It's just
too confusing when the unwinder kicks in for any reason other than "bt", and
just throws us chasing red herrings. I've raised this here now:
https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2014-09/msg00574.html
With that out of the way, this then boils down to just another case of either
getting debug/unwind info for that code, or staring at the disassembly of the
function and seeing whether GDB's fallback heuristic unwinder could be improved
somehow. (I'm no particular ARM expert, so I'll leave that to someone else).
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 28+ messages in thread* [Bug gdb/17384] android arm gdb "Cannot access memory at address" when I "stepi" over "blx"
2014-09-12 13:38 [Bug gdb/17384] New: android arm gdb "Cannot access memory at address" when I "stepi" over "blx" martin at minimum dot se
` (8 preceding siblings ...)
2014-09-17 10:20 ` palves at redhat dot com
@ 2014-09-17 11:23 ` martin at minimum dot se
2014-09-17 11:38 ` palves at redhat dot com
` (16 subsequent siblings)
26 siblings, 0 replies; 28+ messages in thread
From: martin at minimum dot se @ 2014-09-17 11:23 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gdb-prs
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17384
--- Comment #10 from molsson <martin at minimum dot se> ---
I put a breakpoint just below the comment "We have no symbol information" that
I mentioned earlier, and then I ran the code on an AOSP device. And indeed that
block runs even on AOSP. So presence of debuginfo doesn't seem to be what makes
the behavioral difference in AOSP vs non-AOSP; making what you said about
optimization levels an even more likely explanation.
>From a high-level perspective it feels wrong to force the user to
recompile/reinstall his OS just to be able to debug his application; so it
would be really nice if some ARM expert tagged along and asked me the right
questions to allow us to tweak the heuristics sufficiently.
---
Also, regarding safe_read_memory_integer() printing errors I should say that
there is more to that part of the bug than just the fact that the error is
printed. This is because after I type "next" and get the error, I cannot just
run "next" again; at that point gdb just constantly prints "Cannot find bounds
of current function" and refuses to move forward; like this:
Breakpoint 1, blink::RenderFullScreen::createPlaceholder (this=0x34038100,
style=..., frameRect=...) at
../../third_party/WebKit/Source/core/rendering/RenderFullScreen.cpp:188
188 if (style->width().isAuto())
(gdb) n
Cannot access memory at address 0x1
0x4e128838 in ?? () from
/media/ssd/src/opera/opera/chromium/src/out_generic_armv7/Debug/lib/libblink_web.cr.so
(gdb) n
Cannot find bounds of current function
(gdb)
...however, if I run "stepi" three times consecutively I can get out of this
weird state and make gdb get "unstuck" (until the next function call where it
typically gets "stuck" again, needing more "stepi" to continue). Like this:
Breakpoint 1, blink::RenderFullScreen::createPlaceholder (this=0x80238100,
style=..., frameRect=...) at
../../third_party/WebKit/Source/core/rendering/RenderFullScreen.cpp:188
188 if (style->width().isAuto())
(gdb) n
0x7a6c5838 in ?? () from
/media/ssd/src/opera/opera/chromium/src/out_generic_armv7/Debug/lib/libblink_web.cr.so
(gdb) n
Cannot find bounds of current function
(gdb) n
Cannot find bounds of current function
(gdb) stepi
0x7a6c583c in ?? () from
/media/ssd/src/opera/opera/chromium/src/out_generic_armv7/Debug/lib/libblink_web.cr.so
(gdb) stepi
0x7a6c5840 in ?? () from
/media/ssd/src/opera/opera/chromium/src/out_generic_armv7/Debug/lib/libblink_web.cr.so
(gdb) stepi
WTF::RefPtr<WTF::StringImpl>::get (this=0x0) at
../../third_party/WebKit/Source/wtf/OwnPtr.h:71
71 PtrType get() const { return m_ptr; }
(gdb) n
0x7a6bff00 in ?? () from
/media/ssd/src/opera/opera/chromium/src/out_generic_armv7/Debug/lib/libblink_web.cr.so
(gdb) stepi
0x7a6bff04 in ?? () from
/media/ssd/src/opera/opera/chromium/src/out_generic_armv7/Debug/lib/libblink_web.cr.so
(gdb) stepi
0x7a6bff08 in ?? () from
/media/ssd/src/opera/opera/chromium/src/out_generic_armv7/Debug/lib/libblink_web.cr.so
(gdb) stepi
blink::Length::isAuto (this=0x37a90ca8) at
../../third_party/WebKit/Source/platform/Length.h:274
274 bool isAuto() const { return type() == Auto; }
(gdb) n
blink::RenderFullScreen::createPlaceholder (this=0x80238100, style=...,
frameRect=...) at
../../third_party/WebKit/Source/core/rendering/RenderFullScreen.cpp:189
189 style->setWidth(Length(frameRect.width(), Fixed));
(gdb) n
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 28+ messages in thread* [Bug gdb/17384] android arm gdb "Cannot access memory at address" when I "stepi" over "blx"
2014-09-12 13:38 [Bug gdb/17384] New: android arm gdb "Cannot access memory at address" when I "stepi" over "blx" martin at minimum dot se
` (9 preceding siblings ...)
2014-09-17 11:23 ` martin at minimum dot se
@ 2014-09-17 11:38 ` palves at redhat dot com
2014-09-17 15:33 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
` (15 subsequent siblings)
26 siblings, 0 replies; 28+ messages in thread
From: palves at redhat dot com @ 2014-09-17 11:38 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gdb-prs
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17384
--- Comment #11 from Pedro Alves <palves at redhat dot com> ---
> Also, regarding safe_read_memory_integer() printing errors I should say that
> there is more to that part of the bug than just the fact that the error is
> printed. This is because after I type "next" and get the error, I cannot just
> run "next" again; at that point gdb just constantly prints "Cannot find bounds
> of current function" and refuses to move forward; like this:
Yeah, GDB isn't very clear here. GDB is looking for the bounds of the function
in order to do the:
printf_filtered (_("Single stepping until exit from function %s,"
"\nwhich has no line number information.\n"),
name);
bit, which you've probably seen trigger before.
If you do "set step-mode on", GDB will fall back to "stepi" instead of erroring
out.
/* If we have no line info, switch to stepi mode. */
if (tp->control.step_range_end == 0 && step_stop_if_no_debug)
{
tp->control.step_range_start = tp->control.step_range_end = 1;
tp->control.may_range_step = 0;
}
else if (tp->control.step_range_end == 0)
{
const char *name;
if (find_pc_partial_function (pc, &name,
&tp->control.step_range_start,
&tp->control.step_range_end) == 0)
error (_("Cannot find bounds of current function"));
target_terminal_ours ();
printf_filtered (_("Single stepping until exit from function %s,"
"\nwhich has no line number information.\n"),
name);
}
IMO, instead of "error", when we can't find the founds of the function, GDB
should instead switch to stepi mode. I think there's a specific bug open about
this.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 28+ messages in thread* [Bug gdb/17384] android arm gdb "Cannot access memory at address" when I "stepi" over "blx"
2014-09-12 13:38 [Bug gdb/17384] New: android arm gdb "Cannot access memory at address" when I "stepi" over "blx" martin at minimum dot se
` (10 preceding siblings ...)
2014-09-17 11:38 ` palves at redhat dot com
@ 2014-09-17 15:33 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
2014-09-18 7:15 ` martin at minimum dot se
` (14 subsequent siblings)
26 siblings, 0 replies; 28+ messages in thread
From: cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2014-09-17 15:33 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gdb-prs
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17384
--- Comment #12 from cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org <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, master has been updated
via 5e43d46791c4c66fd83947a12d4f716b561a9103 (commit)
from 2569ceb0b02cc5569af5f946d89b578510ac5ea1 (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=5e43d46791c4c66fd83947a12d4f716b561a9103
commit 5e43d46791c4c66fd83947a12d4f716b561a9103
Author: Ulrich Weigand <ulrich.weigand@de.ibm.com>
Date: Wed Sep 17 17:29:27 2014 +0200
PR gdb/17384: Do not print memory errors in safe_read_memory_integer
If accessing memory via safe_read_memory_integer fails, that function
used to print an error message even though callers were perfectly able
to handle (and even expected!) failures.
This patch removes the confusing message by changing the routine to
directly use target_read_memory.
gdb/ChangeLog:
PR gdb/17384
* corefile.c (struct captured_read_memory_integer_arguments): Remove.
(do_captured_read_memory_integer): Remove.
(safe_read_memory_integer): Use target_read_memory directly instead
of catching errors in do_captured_read_memory_integer.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Summary of changes:
gdb/ChangeLog | 8 ++++++++
gdb/corefile.c | 50 +++++---------------------------------------------
2 files changed, 13 insertions(+), 45 deletions(-)
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 28+ messages in thread* [Bug gdb/17384] android arm gdb "Cannot access memory at address" when I "stepi" over "blx"
2014-09-12 13:38 [Bug gdb/17384] New: android arm gdb "Cannot access memory at address" when I "stepi" over "blx" martin at minimum dot se
` (11 preceding siblings ...)
2014-09-17 15:33 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2014-09-18 7:15 ` martin at minimum dot se
2014-09-18 7:28 ` palves at redhat dot com
` (13 subsequent siblings)
26 siblings, 0 replies; 28+ messages in thread
From: martin at minimum dot se @ 2014-09-18 7:15 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gdb-prs
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17384
--- Comment #13 from molsson <martin at minimum dot se> ---
I built master (with Weigand's patch) and I don't see the error message
anymore, so that part of the fix works. Thanks.
Regarding gdb getting stuck in "Cannot find bounds of current function" errors
I think there is some risk of confusion if gdb just switches to stepi silently
because with "next" you expect it not to move into sub functions. It might be
better to change the error message "Cannot find bounds of current function"
into "Cannot find bounds of current function, use stepi to continue instruction
by instruction".
Further, in my particular case I'm stepping inside
blink::RenderFullScreen::createPlaceholder() which is located in
libblink_web.cr.so and "info sharedlibrary" confirms that I do have debug
symbols loaded for this .so file. I guess this might be because of the "stack
frame detection heuristics" you mentioned?
What can I do to debug that part further?
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 28+ messages in thread* [Bug gdb/17384] android arm gdb "Cannot access memory at address" when I "stepi" over "blx"
2014-09-12 13:38 [Bug gdb/17384] New: android arm gdb "Cannot access memory at address" when I "stepi" over "blx" martin at minimum dot se
` (12 preceding siblings ...)
2014-09-18 7:15 ` martin at minimum dot se
@ 2014-09-18 7:28 ` palves at redhat dot com
2014-09-18 7:33 ` palves at redhat dot com
` (12 subsequent siblings)
26 siblings, 0 replies; 28+ messages in thread
From: palves at redhat dot com @ 2014-09-18 7:28 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gdb-prs
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17384
--- Comment #14 from Pedro Alves <palves at redhat dot com> ---
> Regarding gdb getting stuck in "Cannot find bounds of current function" errors
> I think there is some risk of confusion if gdb just switches to stepi silently
> because with "next" you expect it not to move into sub functions.
True. Seems like we may already have that with "set step-mode on" (*).
Maybe we could do "next" -> "nexti"; "step" -> "stepi".
(*) gosh, we should rename that setting to something that actually has meaning.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 28+ messages in thread* [Bug gdb/17384] android arm gdb "Cannot access memory at address" when I "stepi" over "blx"
2014-09-12 13:38 [Bug gdb/17384] New: android arm gdb "Cannot access memory at address" when I "stepi" over "blx" martin at minimum dot se
` (13 preceding siblings ...)
2014-09-18 7:28 ` palves at redhat dot com
@ 2014-09-18 7:33 ` palves at redhat dot com
2014-09-18 8:44 ` palves at redhat dot com
` (11 subsequent siblings)
26 siblings, 0 replies; 28+ messages in thread
From: palves at redhat dot com @ 2014-09-18 7:33 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gdb-prs
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17384
--- Comment #15 from Pedro Alves <palves at redhat dot com> ---
> Maybe we could do "next" -> "nexti"; "step" -> "stepi".
Actually, I haven't tried that, but looking at the code, I think that's already
what happens (w/ "step-mode on").
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 28+ messages in thread* [Bug gdb/17384] android arm gdb "Cannot access memory at address" when I "stepi" over "blx"
2014-09-12 13:38 [Bug gdb/17384] New: android arm gdb "Cannot access memory at address" when I "stepi" over "blx" martin at minimum dot se
` (14 preceding siblings ...)
2014-09-18 7:33 ` palves at redhat dot com
@ 2014-09-18 8:44 ` palves at redhat dot com
2014-09-18 17:40 ` palves at redhat dot com
` (10 subsequent siblings)
26 siblings, 0 replies; 28+ messages in thread
From: palves at redhat dot com @ 2014-09-18 8:44 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gdb-prs
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17384
--- Comment #16 from Pedro Alves <palves at redhat dot com> ---
> Further, in my particular case I'm stepping inside
> blink::RenderFullScreen::createPlaceholder() which is located in
> libblink_web.cr.so and "info sharedlibrary" confirms that I do have debug
> symbols loaded for this .so file. I guess this might be because of the "stack
> frame detection heuristics" you mentioned?
> What can I do to debug that part further?
Let me try to clear terminology a bit.
GDB has several unwinders installed. If there's debug/unwind/dwarf info, we'll
pick that one, and that should fully describe how to unwind correctly at each
instruction's address. If GDB can't unwind correctly with dwarf info
available, then either we have a bug in the dwarf unwinder, or the debug/unwind
info is incomplete or incorrect (which is more often correct, though reader
bugs do happen). The "heuristics" part kicks in when no debug/unwind info is
available. GDB then has to fall back to parsing the function prologue's
instructions, looking for something that looks like a new frame being set up,
and tries to figure out where in memory that starts, and where in the stack has
each register been saved, etc. It'll break down if the compiler did something
too clever. This is the part that is heuristic, as it's impossible to handle
all possible input.
Because we saw this:
#7 0x000000000041122a in arm_scan_prologue (cache=0x1e51ec0,
this_frame=0x1e51e00) at arm-tdep.c:1996
#8 arm_make_prologue_cache (this_frame=0x1e51e00) at arm-tdep.c:2022
#9 0x000000000041142a in arm_prologue_this_id (this_frame=0x1e51e00,
this_cache=0x1e51e18, this_id=0x1e51e60) at arm-tdep.c:2052
#10 0x00000000005e4ea4 in compute_frame_id (fi=0x1e51e00) at frame.c:459
#11 get_prev_frame_if_no_cycle (this_frame=this_frame@entry=0x1e51470) at
frame.c:1781
#12 0x00000000005e72ca in get_prev_frame_always_1 (this_frame=0x1e51470) at
frame.c:1955
that is, you're reaching arm_scan_prologue, we can tell that GDB fell back to
the ARM's heuristic unwinder. arm_analyze_prologue, its callee, is where the
the prologue parsing and finding out of where registers have been saved is.
But in order for that to be reached, GDB needs to at least know where the
function starts/ends. And it doesn not. We can tell, because you're reaching
this part:
else
{
/* We have no symbol information. Our only option is to assume this
function has a standard stack frame and the normal frame register.
Then, we can find the value of our frame pointer on entrance to
the callee (or at the present moment if this is the innermost frame).
The value stored there should be the address of the stmfd + 8. */
CORE_ADDR frame_loc;
LONGEST return_value;
frame_loc = get_frame_register_unsigned (this_frame, ARM_FP_REGNUM);
if (!safe_read_memory_integer (frame_loc, 4, byte_order, &return_value))
return; <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
else
{
prologue_start = gdbarch_addr_bits_remove
(gdbarch, return_value) - 8;
prologue_end = prologue_start + 64; /* See above. */
}
}
and hitting that early return, which means that GDB thinks you have _no_ symbol
information whatsoever for that address, not even minimal elf info, and then
the function doesn't appear to have been built with a frame pointer
(-fomit-frame-pointer), as the frame pointer points at 1.
We also know that GDB believes you don't have debug info for that function by
another mechanism -- "next" complains about it (the "Cannot find bounds of
current function" error).
So it all indicates GDB doesn't believe you have any debug info for that
address. Is libblink_web.cr.so fully stripped?
What does "info symbol $pc" say in the problem case?
In order to see the unwinder selection process, you can set a breakpoint at
frame_unwind_try_unwinder, and see GDB trying the dwarf2 unwinder first, and
check why that unwinder refuses the frame. There's also "set debug frame", but
unfortunately that doesn't show anything about the unwinder selection process.
But that seems irrelevant, as we can tell from other means that you have no
debug info for that function.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 28+ messages in thread* [Bug gdb/17384] android arm gdb "Cannot access memory at address" when I "stepi" over "blx"
2014-09-12 13:38 [Bug gdb/17384] New: android arm gdb "Cannot access memory at address" when I "stepi" over "blx" martin at minimum dot se
` (15 preceding siblings ...)
2014-09-18 8:44 ` palves at redhat dot com
@ 2014-09-18 17:40 ` palves at redhat dot com
2014-09-19 14:54 ` martin at minimum dot se
` (9 subsequent siblings)
26 siblings, 0 replies; 28+ messages in thread
From: palves at redhat dot com @ 2014-09-18 17:40 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gdb-prs
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17384
--- Comment #18 from Pedro Alves <palves at redhat dot com> ---
I've play with "objdump -h", "nm -A", "readelf --symbols", "readelf -dw" etc.,
to check if there are symbols that cover the missing range. Somehow sounds
like there's a hole (or gdb thinks so). The mention of BLX makes me wonder if
this is somehow a thumb-bit thing, like the thumb bit set or missing on some
address, confusing bfd/gdb.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 28+ messages in thread* [Bug gdb/17384] android arm gdb "Cannot access memory at address" when I "stepi" over "blx"
2014-09-12 13:38 [Bug gdb/17384] New: android arm gdb "Cannot access memory at address" when I "stepi" over "blx" martin at minimum dot se
` (16 preceding siblings ...)
2014-09-18 17:40 ` palves at redhat dot com
@ 2014-09-19 14:54 ` martin at minimum dot se
2014-09-19 15:25 ` palves at redhat dot com
` (8 subsequent siblings)
26 siblings, 0 replies; 28+ messages in thread
From: martin at minimum dot se @ 2014-09-19 14:54 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gdb-prs
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17384
--- Comment #19 from molsson <martin at minimum dot se> ---
This is what "info symbol $pc" says before and after running the blx
instruction:
(gdb) info symbol $pc
blink::RenderFullScreen::createPlaceholder(WTF::PassRefPtr<blink::RenderStyle>,
blink::LayoutRect const&) + 14 in section .text of
/media/ssd/src/opera/opera/chromium/src/out_generic_armv7/Debug/lib/libblink_web
.cr.so
(gdb) stepi
0x7a6f2ac0 in ?? () from
/media/ssd/src/opera/opera/chromium/src/out_generic_armv7/Debug/lib/libblink_web.cr.so
(gdb) info symbol $pc
No symbol matches $pc.
The range for listed in "info sharedlibrary" for libblink_web.cr.so is: from
0x7909aa90 to 0x7a70bae8 so the pc is still within the bounds of that .so file
after the blx.
Running "file libblink_web.cr.so" on the exact file that is listed under "info
sharedlibrary" says "not stripped", and running "objdump --debugging
libblink_web.cr.so" on it prints lots of stuff.
Here is what some of the other tools say about this file:
http://temp.minimum.se/objdump_-h.txt
http://temp.minimum.se/nm_-A_libblink_web.cr.so.txt
http://temp.minimum.se/readelf_--symbols_libblink_web.cr.so.txt
The output of "readelf -dw" was 7GB when I CTRL-C'd it so I can't upload it.
FWIW, the size of this .so file is 955M so it's quite large (it contains all of
the blink web engine). Here is the full file btw:
http://temp.minimum.se/libblink_web.cr.so
I wasn't able to experiment with the unwinder selection breakpoint today,
hopefully I can do it monday.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 28+ messages in thread* [Bug gdb/17384] android arm gdb "Cannot access memory at address" when I "stepi" over "blx"
2014-09-12 13:38 [Bug gdb/17384] New: android arm gdb "Cannot access memory at address" when I "stepi" over "blx" martin at minimum dot se
` (17 preceding siblings ...)
2014-09-19 14:54 ` martin at minimum dot se
@ 2014-09-19 15:25 ` palves at redhat dot com
2014-09-22 9:12 ` martin at minimum dot se
` (7 subsequent siblings)
26 siblings, 0 replies; 28+ messages in thread
From: palves at redhat dot com @ 2014-09-19 15:25 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gdb-prs
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17384
--- Comment #20 from Pedro Alves <palves at redhat dot com> ---
> (gdb) disassemble /r 0x4e0dcc20,+10
> Dump of assembler code from 0x4e0dcc20 to 0x4e0dcc2a:
> 0x4e0dcc20: 04 c0 9f e5 ldr r12, [pc, #4] ; 0x4e0dcc2c
> 0x4e0dcc24: 0c c0 8f e0 add r12, pc, r12
> 0x4e0dcc28: 1c ff 2f e1 bx r12
> End of assembler dump.
I wonder whether that's some sort of trampoline the compiler/linker is
generating
and gdb is not grokking.
See arm_stub_unwind_sniffer and arm_skip_bx_reg.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 28+ messages in thread* [Bug gdb/17384] android arm gdb "Cannot access memory at address" when I "stepi" over "blx"
2014-09-12 13:38 [Bug gdb/17384] New: android arm gdb "Cannot access memory at address" when I "stepi" over "blx" martin at minimum dot se
` (18 preceding siblings ...)
2014-09-19 15:25 ` palves at redhat dot com
@ 2014-09-22 9:12 ` martin at minimum dot se
2014-09-22 13:12 ` qiyao at gcc dot gnu.org
` (6 subsequent siblings)
26 siblings, 0 replies; 28+ messages in thread
From: martin at minimum dot se @ 2014-09-22 9:12 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gdb-prs
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17384
--- Comment #21 from molsson <martin at minimum dot se> ---
If I run with a breakpoint on frame_unwind_find_by_frame() as I step of the
"blx" instruction, I see this happening:
It doesn't exit early when checking "target_get_unwinder" and
"target_get_tailcall_unwinder", instead it goes into the "unwinders loop";
these unwinders seem to be:
$1 = {
type = DUMMY_FRAME,
stop_reason = 0x68dfa1 <default_frame_unwind_stop_reason>,
this_id = 0x4f6e66 <dummy_frame_this_id>,
prev_register = 0x4f6db9 <dummy_frame_prev_register>,
unwind_data = 0x0,
sniffer = 0x4f6c83 <dummy_frame_sniffer>,
dealloc_cache = 0x0,
prev_arch = 0x0
}
$2 = {
type = INLINE_FRAME,
stop_reason = 0x68dfa1 <default_frame_unwind_stop_reason>,
this_id = 0x6905f2 <inline_frame_this_id>,
prev_register = 0x69075d <inline_frame_prev_register>,
unwind_data = 0x0,
sniffer = 0x690783 <inline_frame_sniffer>,
dealloc_cache = 0x0,
prev_arch = 0x0
}
$3 = {
type = NORMAL_FRAME,
stop_reason = 0x68dfa1 <default_frame_unwind_stop_reason>,
this_id = 0x69ea4e <tramp_frame_this_id>,
prev_register = 0x69ea8e <tramp_frame_prev_register>,
unwind_data = 0x1802db0,
sniffer = 0x69ec2f <tramp_frame_sniffer>,
dealloc_cache = 0x0,
prev_arch = 0x0
}
$4 = {
type = NORMAL_FRAME,
stop_reason = 0x68dfa1 <default_frame_unwind_stop_reason>,
this_id = 0x69ea4e <tramp_frame_this_id>,
prev_register = 0x69ea8e <tramp_frame_prev_register>,
unwind_data = 0x1802d50,
sniffer = 0x69ec2f <tramp_frame_sniffer>,
dealloc_cache = 0x0,
prev_arch = 0x0
}
$5 = {
type = SIGTRAMP_FRAME,
stop_reason = 0x68dfa1 <default_frame_unwind_stop_reason>,
this_id = 0x69ea4e <tramp_frame_this_id>,
prev_register = 0x69ea8e <tramp_frame_prev_register>,
unwind_data = 0x1802cf0,
sniffer = 0x69ec2f <tramp_frame_sniffer>,
dealloc_cache = 0x0,
prev_arch = 0x0
}
$6 = {
type = SIGTRAMP_FRAME,
stop_reason = 0x68dfa1 <default_frame_unwind_stop_reason>,
this_id = 0x69ea4e <tramp_frame_this_id>,
prev_register = 0x69ea8e <tramp_frame_prev_register>,
unwind_data = 0x1802c90,
sniffer = 0x69ec2f <tramp_frame_sniffer>,
dealloc_cache = 0x0,
prev_arch = 0x0
}
$7 = {
type = SIGTRAMP_FRAME,
stop_reason = 0x68dfa1 <default_frame_unwind_stop_reason>,
this_id = 0x69ea4e <tramp_frame_this_id>,
prev_register = 0x69ea8e <tramp_frame_prev_register>,
unwind_data = 0x1802c30,
sniffer = 0x69ec2f <tramp_frame_sniffer>,
dealloc_cache = 0x0,
prev_arch = 0x0
}
$8 = {
type = SIGTRAMP_FRAME,
stop_reason = 0x68dfa1 <default_frame_unwind_stop_reason>,
this_id = 0x69ea4e <tramp_frame_this_id>,
prev_register = 0x69ea8e <tramp_frame_prev_register>,
unwind_data = 0x1802bd0,
sniffer = 0x69ec2f <tramp_frame_sniffer>,
dealloc_cache = 0x0,
prev_arch = 0x0
}
$9 = {
type = SIGTRAMP_FRAME,
stop_reason = 0x68dfa1 <default_frame_unwind_stop_reason>,
this_id = 0x69ea4e <tramp_frame_this_id>,
prev_register = 0x69ea8e <tramp_frame_prev_register>,
unwind_data = 0x1802b70,
sniffer = 0x69ec2f <tramp_frame_sniffer>,
dealloc_cache = 0x0,
prev_arch = 0x0
}
$10 = {
type = SIGTRAMP_FRAME,
stop_reason = 0x68dfa1 <default_frame_unwind_stop_reason>,
this_id = 0x69ea4e <tramp_frame_this_id>,
prev_register = 0x69ea8e <tramp_frame_prev_register>,
unwind_data = 0x1802ae0,
sniffer = 0x69ec2f <tramp_frame_sniffer>,
dealloc_cache = 0x0,
prev_arch = 0x0
}
$11 = {
type = NORMAL_FRAME,
stop_reason = 0x68dfa1 <default_frame_unwind_stop_reason>,
this_id = 0x410457 <arm_stub_this_id>,
prev_register = 0x40e2e1 <arm_prologue_prev_register>,
unwind_data = 0x0,
sniffer = 0x4104e8 <arm_stub_unwind_sniffer>,
dealloc_cache = 0x0,
prev_arch = 0x0
}
$12 = {
type = TAILCALL_FRAME,
stop_reason = 0x68dfa1 <default_frame_unwind_stop_reason>,
this_id = 0x61f731 <tailcall_frame_this_id>,
prev_register = 0x61fa95 <tailcall_frame_prev_register>,
unwind_data = 0x0,
sniffer = 0x61fb29 <tailcall_frame_sniffer>,
dealloc_cache = 0x61fe9c <tailcall_frame_dealloc_cache>,
prev_arch = 0x61fec2 <tailcall_frame_prev_arch>
}
$13 = {
type = NORMAL_FRAME,
stop_reason = 0x61c7fd <dwarf2_frame_unwind_stop_reason>,
this_id = 0x61c84f <dwarf2_frame_this_id>,
prev_register = 0x61c925 <dwarf2_frame_prev_register>,
unwind_data = 0x0,
sniffer = 0x61cde1 <dwarf2_frame_sniffer>,
dealloc_cache = 0x61cd90 <dwarf2_frame_dealloc_cache>,
prev_arch = 0x0
}
$14 = {
type = SIGTRAMP_FRAME,
stop_reason = 0x61c7fd <dwarf2_frame_unwind_stop_reason>,
this_id = 0x61c84f <dwarf2_frame_this_id>,
prev_register = 0x61c925 <dwarf2_frame_prev_register>,
unwind_data = 0x0,
sniffer = 0x61cde1 <dwarf2_frame_sniffer>,
dealloc_cache = 0x0,
prev_arch = 0x0
}
$15 = {
type = NORMAL_FRAME,
stop_reason = 0x68dfa1 <default_frame_unwind_stop_reason>,
this_id = 0x40e204 <arm_prologue_this_id>,
prev_register = 0x40e2e1 <arm_prologue_prev_register>,
unwind_data = 0x0,
sniffer = 0x410197 <arm_exidx_unwind_sniffer>,
dealloc_cache = 0x0,
prev_arch = 0x0
}
This last unwinder (labelled $15 above) is the first one where I hit the
"return;" part of the loop and thereby exit frame_unwind_find_by_frame().
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 28+ messages in thread* [Bug gdb/17384] android arm gdb "Cannot access memory at address" when I "stepi" over "blx"
2014-09-12 13:38 [Bug gdb/17384] New: android arm gdb "Cannot access memory at address" when I "stepi" over "blx" martin at minimum dot se
` (19 preceding siblings ...)
2014-09-22 9:12 ` martin at minimum dot se
@ 2014-09-22 13:12 ` qiyao at gcc dot gnu.org
2014-09-23 9:23 ` qiyao at gcc dot gnu.org
` (5 subsequent siblings)
26 siblings, 0 replies; 28+ messages in thread
From: qiyao at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2014-09-22 13:12 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gdb-prs
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17384
Yao Qi <qiyao at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |qiyao at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #22 from Yao Qi <qiyao at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Pedro Alves from comment #20)
> > (gdb) disassemble /r 0x4e0dcc20,+10
> > Dump of assembler code from 0x4e0dcc20 to 0x4e0dcc2a:
> > 0x4e0dcc20: 04 c0 9f e5 ldr r12, [pc, #4] ; 0x4e0dcc2c
> > 0x4e0dcc24: 0c c0 8f e0 add r12, pc, r12
> > 0x4e0dcc28: 1c ff 2f e1 bx r12
> > End of assembler dump.
>
> I wonder whether that's some sort of trampoline the compiler/linker is
> generating
> and gdb is not grokking.
>
Yes, it is a trampoline and GDB isn't aware of that.
See bfd/elf32-arm.c:
static const insn_sequence elf32_arm_stub_long_branch_any_thumb_pic[] =
{
ARM_INSN (0xe59fc004), /* ldr ip, [pc, #4] */
ARM_INSN (0xe08fc00c), /* add ip, pc, ip */
ARM_INSN (0xe12fff1c), /* bx ip */
DATA_WORD (0, R_ARM_REL32, 0), /* dcd R_ARM_REL32(X) */
};
We need to teach GDB to understand it in both arm_stub_unwind_sniffer and
arm_skip_stub. I'll take a look.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 28+ messages in thread* [Bug gdb/17384] android arm gdb "Cannot access memory at address" when I "stepi" over "blx"
2014-09-12 13:38 [Bug gdb/17384] New: android arm gdb "Cannot access memory at address" when I "stepi" over "blx" martin at minimum dot se
` (20 preceding siblings ...)
2014-09-22 13:12 ` qiyao at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2014-09-23 9:23 ` qiyao at gcc dot gnu.org
2014-09-23 12:50 ` martin at minimum dot se
` (4 subsequent siblings)
26 siblings, 0 replies; 28+ messages in thread
From: qiyao at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2014-09-23 9:23 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gdb-prs
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17384
--- Comment #23 from Yao Qi <qiyao at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to molsson from comment #17)
> Also, I can put a breakpoint on certain other functions like for example
> base::debug::TaskAnnotator::RunTask() and there I can use "next" without
> problems so there seems to be something special with
> blink::RenderFullScreen::createPlaceholder() or possibly with one of the
> functions it calls. Maybe something with inlining, or maybe because it's
> static, not sure.
>
molsson,
Is your problem that can't use "next" in function
blink::RenderFullScreen::createPlaceholder()? What is the output and message
of GDB? You mixed your analysis and the problem report together, it makes
harder to understand what the problem is.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 28+ messages in thread* [Bug gdb/17384] android arm gdb "Cannot access memory at address" when I "stepi" over "blx"
2014-09-12 13:38 [Bug gdb/17384] New: android arm gdb "Cannot access memory at address" when I "stepi" over "blx" martin at minimum dot se
` (21 preceding siblings ...)
2014-09-23 9:23 ` qiyao at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2014-09-23 12:50 ` martin at minimum dot se
2014-09-24 11:57 ` qiyao at gcc dot gnu.org
` (3 subsequent siblings)
26 siblings, 0 replies; 28+ messages in thread
From: martin at minimum dot se @ 2014-09-23 12:50 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gdb-prs
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17384
--- Comment #24 from molsson <martin at minimum dot se> ---
At first I had this error printed saying "Cannot access memory at address 0x1"
but Ulrich Weigand's fix makes sure that this error is no longer printed. AFAIK
that fix did so by suppressing the printout and I don't know if gdb is meant to
attempt reading at 0x1 or not (sounds unlikely?) so I guess this attempted read
is a side affect of incorrect assumptions about the prologue it is trying to
analyze?
The main remaining bug for me is, as you say, that when I try to move through
this function using "next" commands, gdb gets stuck in a mode where it just
prints "Cannot find bounds of current function" without moving forward:
Breakpoint 1, blink::RenderFullScreen::createPlaceholder (this=0x7f038100,
style=..., frameRect=...) at
../../third_party/WebKit/Source/core/rendering/RenderFullScreen.cpp:188
188 if (style->width().isAuto())
(gdb) n
0x7a6f4ac0 in ?? () from
/media/ssd/src/opera/opera/chromium/src/out_generic_armv7/Debug/lib/libblink_web.cr.so
(gdb) n
Cannot find bounds of current function
(gdb) n
Cannot find bounds of current function
(gdb)
Also when I'm in this mode the "bt" looks like this:
(gdb) bt
#0 0x7a6f4ac0 in ?? () from
/media/ssd/src/opera/opera/chromium/src/out_generic_armv7/Debug/lib/libblink_web.cr.so
#1 0x7f038100 in ?? ()
Backtrace stopped: previous frame identical to this frame (corrupt stack?)
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 28+ messages in thread* [Bug gdb/17384] android arm gdb "Cannot access memory at address" when I "stepi" over "blx"
2014-09-12 13:38 [Bug gdb/17384] New: android arm gdb "Cannot access memory at address" when I "stepi" over "blx" martin at minimum dot se
` (22 preceding siblings ...)
2014-09-23 12:50 ` martin at minimum dot se
@ 2014-09-24 11:57 ` qiyao at gcc dot gnu.org
2014-10-09 8:10 ` qiyao at gcc dot gnu.org
` (2 subsequent siblings)
26 siblings, 0 replies; 28+ messages in thread
From: qiyao at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2014-09-24 11:57 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gdb-prs
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17384
--- Comment #25 from Yao Qi <qiyao at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
An update here...
What I am doing right now is to get a minimal c file and a set compilation
options, with them, I can produce this trampoline too. I dig into ld source to
see when such long branch stub can be used, but ld source is new to me, so it
takes time to get a minimal case.
The GDB fix should be straightforward once the case is ready.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 28+ messages in thread* [Bug gdb/17384] android arm gdb "Cannot access memory at address" when I "stepi" over "blx"
2014-09-12 13:38 [Bug gdb/17384] New: android arm gdb "Cannot access memory at address" when I "stepi" over "blx" martin at minimum dot se
` (23 preceding siblings ...)
2014-09-24 11:57 ` qiyao at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2014-10-09 8:10 ` qiyao at gcc dot gnu.org
2014-10-14 8:32 ` martin at minimum dot se
2014-10-14 11:01 ` martin at minimum dot se
26 siblings, 0 replies; 28+ messages in thread
From: qiyao at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2014-10-09 8:10 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gdb-prs
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17384
--- Comment #26 from Yao Qi <qiyao at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to molsson from comment #24)
I've got a small case which has such stub,
0x20011ce <main+33558534>: blx 0x20011d8
0x020011d2 <main+33558538>: 00 23 movs r3, #0
...
...
0x20011d8: ldr r12, [pc, #4] ; 0x20011e4
0x20011dc: add r12, pc, r12
0x20011e0: bx r12
but GDB behaves correctly.
infrun: stop_pc = 0x20011d8^M
infrun: stepped into subroutine^M
infrun: inserting step-resume breakpoint at 0x20011d2^M
infrun: resume (step=0, signal=GDB_SIGNAL_0), trap_expected=0, current thread
[Thread 1] at 0x20011d8^M
infrun: prepare_to_wait^M
infrun: target_wait (-1, status) =^M
infrun: 42000 [Thread 1],^M
infrun: status->kind = stopped, signal = GDB_SIGNAL_TRAP^M
infrun: infwait_normal_state^M
infrun: TARGET_WAITKIND_STOPPED^M
infrun: stop_pc = 0x20011d2^M
infrun: BPSTAT_WHAT_STEP_RESUME^M
infrun: stepped to a different line^M
infrun: stop_waiting^M
14 return 0;
so I want to see your log.
>
> Breakpoint 1, blink::RenderFullScreen::createPlaceholder (this=0x7f038100,
> style=..., frameRect=...) at
> ../../third_party/WebKit/Source/core/rendering/RenderFullScreen.cpp:188
> 188 if (style->width().isAuto())
> (gdb) n
> 0x7a6f4ac0 in ?? () from
> /media/ssd/src/opera/opera/chromium/src/out_generic_armv7/Debug/lib/
> libblink_web.cr.so
before type command "n", please do "set debug infrun 1". Copy the output here.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
>From gdb-prs-return-16804-listarch-gdb-prs=sources.redhat.com@sourceware.org Thu Oct 09 13:31:47 2014
Return-Path: <gdb-prs-return-16804-listarch-gdb-prs=sources.redhat.com@sourceware.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gdb-prs@sources.redhat.com
Received: (qmail 16357 invoked by alias); 9 Oct 2014 13:31:47 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gdb-prs-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gdb-prs.sourceware.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gdb-prs-subscribe@sourceware.org>
List-Archive: <http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-prs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gdb-prs@sourceware.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gdb-prs-help@sourceware.org>, <http://sourceware.org/lists.html#faqs>
Sender: gdb-prs-owner@sourceware.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gdb-prs@sourceware.org
Received: (qmail 16274 invoked by uid 48); 9 Oct 2014 13:31:45 -0000
From: "palves at redhat dot com" <sourceware-bugzilla@sourceware.org>
To: gdb-prs@sourceware.org
Subject: [Bug gdb/17471] repeating a background command makes it foreground
Date: Thu, 09 Oct 2014 13:31:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gdb
X-Bugzilla-Component: gdb
X-Bugzilla-Version: HEAD
X-Bugzilla-Keywords:
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: palves at redhat dot com
X-Bugzilla-Status: ASSIGNED
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P2
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: palves at redhat dot com
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: ---
X-Bugzilla-Flags:
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: bug_status assigned_to
Message-ID: <bug-17471-4717-8zkxHhZc9w@http.sourceware.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-17471-4717@http.sourceware.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-17471-4717@http.sourceware.org/bugzilla/>
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/msg00047.txt.bz2
Content-length: 524
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id\x17471
Pedro Alves <palves at redhat dot com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned at sourceware dot org |palves at redhat dot com
--- Comment #1 from Pedro Alves <palves at redhat dot com> ---
Mine.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 28+ messages in thread* [Bug gdb/17384] android arm gdb "Cannot access memory at address" when I "stepi" over "blx"
2014-09-12 13:38 [Bug gdb/17384] New: android arm gdb "Cannot access memory at address" when I "stepi" over "blx" martin at minimum dot se
` (24 preceding siblings ...)
2014-10-09 8:10 ` qiyao at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2014-10-14 8:32 ` martin at minimum dot se
2014-10-14 11:01 ` martin at minimum dot se
26 siblings, 0 replies; 28+ messages in thread
From: martin at minimum dot se @ 2014-10-14 8:32 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gdb-prs
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17384
--- Comment #27 from molsson <martin at minimum dot se> ---
This is using the bog standard gdb 7.6 that Google ships in the Android NDK:
Breakpoint 1, blink::RenderFullScreen::createPlaceholder (this=0x7f638100,
style=..., frameRect=...) at
../../third_party/WebKit/Source/core/rendering/RenderFullScreen.cpp:188
188 if (style->width().isAuto())
(gdb) set debug infrun 1
(gdb) n
infrun: clear_proceed_status_thread (Thread 7128)
infrun: clear_proceed_status_thread (Thread 7106)
infrun: proceed (addr=0xffffffff, signal=144, step=1)
infrun: resume (step=1, signal=0), trap_expected=1, current thread [Thread
7128] at 0x7a5b1170
infrun: wait_for_inferior ()
infrun: target_wait (-1, status) =
infrun: 7106 [Thread 7128],
infrun: status->kind = stopped, signal = SIGTRAP
infrun: infwait_normal_state
infrun: TARGET_WAITKIND_STOPPED
infrun: stop_pc = 0x7a5b1172
infrun: software single step trap for Thread 7128
infrun: stepping inside range [0x7a5b1170-0x7a5b118c]
infrun: resume (step=1, signal=0), trap_expected=0, current thread [Thread
7128] at 0x7a5b1172
infrun: prepare_to_wait
infrun: target_wait (-1, status) =
infrun: 7106 [Thread 7128],
infrun: status->kind = stopped, signal = SIGTRAP
infrun: infwait_normal_state
infrun: TARGET_WAITKIND_STOPPED
infrun: stop_pc = 0x7a797ac0
infrun: software single step trap for Thread 7128
infrun: no line number info
infrun: stop_stepping
0x7a797ac0 in ?? () from
/media/ssd/src/opera/opera/chromium/src/out_generic_armv7/Debug/lib/libblink_web.cr.so
(gdb) n
infrun: clear_proceed_status_thread (Thread 7128)
infrun: clear_proceed_status_thread (Thread 7106)
Cannot find bounds of current function
(gdb)
I spent a few hours yesterday trying to build gdb git master for android but I
couldn't get gdbserver to build, so I wasn't able to test with that version.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 28+ messages in thread* [Bug gdb/17384] android arm gdb "Cannot access memory at address" when I "stepi" over "blx"
2014-09-12 13:38 [Bug gdb/17384] New: android arm gdb "Cannot access memory at address" when I "stepi" over "blx" martin at minimum dot se
` (25 preceding siblings ...)
2014-10-14 8:32 ` martin at minimum dot se
@ 2014-10-14 11:01 ` martin at minimum dot se
26 siblings, 0 replies; 28+ messages in thread
From: martin at minimum dot se @ 2014-10-14 11:01 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gdb-prs
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17384
--- Comment #28 from molsson <martin at minimum dot se> ---
Here is an alternative test run; for this one I used gdb 7.8.50.20141014-cvs
built from c50415e, but since I couldn't build the corresponding gdbserver I
used the arm gdbserver binary from android NDK r10b instead (i.e. their
android-ndk-r10b/prebuilt/android-arm/gdbserver/gdbserver ARM binary). Since
there was no warning, I am _guessing_ that this gdbserver is compatible with
this gdb version.
Breakpoint 1, blink::RenderFullScreen::createPlaceholder (this=0x80238100,
style=..., frameRect=...) at
../../third_party/WebKit/Source/core/rendering/RenderFullScreen.cpp:188
188 if (style->width().isAuto())
(gdb) set debug infrun 1
(gdb) n
infrun: clear_proceed_status_thread (Thread 9311)
infrun: clear_proceed_status_thread (Thread 9310)
infrun: clear_proceed_status_thread (Thread 9305)
infrun: clear_proceed_status_thread (Thread 9304)
infrun: clear_proceed_status_thread (Thread 9303)
infrun: clear_proceed_status_thread (Thread 9302)
infrun: clear_proceed_status_thread (Thread 9301)
infrun: clear_proceed_status_thread (Thread 9300)
infrun: clear_proceed_status_thread (Thread 9299)
infrun: clear_proceed_status_thread (Thread 9297)
infrun: clear_proceed_status_thread (Thread 9296)
infrun: clear_proceed_status_thread (Thread 9295)
infrun: clear_proceed_status_thread (Thread 9294)
infrun: clear_proceed_status_thread (Thread 9293)
infrun: clear_proceed_status_thread (Thread 9292)
infrun: clear_proceed_status_thread (Thread 9291)
infrun: clear_proceed_status_thread (Thread 9290)
infrun: clear_proceed_status_thread (Thread 9289)
infrun: clear_proceed_status_thread (Thread 9285)
infrun: proceed (addr=0xffffffff, signal=GDB_SIGNAL_DEFAULT, step=1)
infrun: skipping breakpoint: stepping past insn at: 0x7a5b1170
infrun: skipping breakpoint: stepping past insn at: 0x7a5b1170
infrun: resume (step=1, signal=GDB_SIGNAL_0), trap_expected=1, current thread
[Thread 9299] at 0x7a5b1170
infrun: target_wait (-1, status) =
infrun: 9285 [Thread 9299],
infrun: status->kind = stopped, signal = GDB_SIGNAL_TRAP
infrun: infwait_normal_state
infrun: TARGET_WAITKIND_STOPPED
infrun: stop_pc = 0x7a5b1172
infrun: stepping inside range [0x7a5b1170-0x7a5b118c]
infrun: resume (step=1, signal=GDB_SIGNAL_0), trap_expected=0, current thread
[Thread 9299] at 0x7a5b1172
infrun: prepare_to_wait
infrun: target_wait (-1, status) =
infrun: 9285 [Thread 9299],
infrun: status->kind = stopped, signal = GDB_SIGNAL_TRAP
infrun: infwait_normal_state
infrun: TARGET_WAITKIND_STOPPED
infrun: stop_pc = 0x7a797ac0
infrun: no line number info
infrun: stop_waiting
0x7a797ac0 in ?? () from
/media/ssd/src/opera/opera/chromium/src/out_generic_armv7/Debug/lib/libblink_web.cr.so
(gdb) n
infrun: clear_proceed_status_thread (Thread 9311)
infrun: clear_proceed_status_thread (Thread 9310)
infrun: clear_proceed_status_thread (Thread 9305)
infrun: clear_proceed_status_thread (Thread 9304)
infrun: clear_proceed_status_thread (Thread 9303)
infrun: clear_proceed_status_thread (Thread 9302)
infrun: clear_proceed_status_thread (Thread 9301)
infrun: clear_proceed_status_thread (Thread 9300)
infrun: clear_proceed_status_thread (Thread 9299)
infrun: clear_proceed_status_thread (Thread 9297)
infrun: clear_proceed_status_thread (Thread 9296)
infrun: clear_proceed_status_thread (Thread 9295)
infrun: clear_proceed_status_thread (Thread 9294)
infrun: clear_proceed_status_thread (Thread 9293)
infrun: clear_proceed_status_thread (Thread 9292)
infrun: clear_proceed_status_thread (Thread 9291)
infrun: clear_proceed_status_thread (Thread 9290)
infrun: clear_proceed_status_thread (Thread 9289)
infrun: clear_proceed_status_thread (Thread 9285)
Cannot find bounds of current function
(gdb)
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 28+ messages in thread