* [Bug gdb/25939] [10 regression] run fails with ICE on Solaris
2020-05-07 11:11 [Bug gdb/25939] New: [10 regression] run fails with ICE on Solaris ro at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2020-05-07 11:11 ` ro at gcc dot gnu.org
2020-05-18 15:57 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
` (7 subsequent siblings)
8 siblings, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: ro at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2020-05-07 11:11 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gdb-prs
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25939
Rainer Orth <ro at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Target Milestone|--- |10.1
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread* [Bug gdb/25939] [10 regression] run fails with ICE on Solaris
2020-05-07 11:11 [Bug gdb/25939] New: [10 regression] run fails with ICE on Solaris ro at gcc dot gnu.org
2020-05-07 11:11 ` [Bug gdb/25939] " ro at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2020-05-18 15:57 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
2020-05-19 8:04 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
` (6 subsequent siblings)
8 siblings, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2020-05-18 15:57 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gdb-prs
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25939
--- Comment #1 from cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org <cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
The master branch has been updated by Rainer Orth <ro@sourceware.org>:
https://sourceware.org/git/gitweb.cgi?p=binutils-gdb.git;h=7f2043399809c0ba5c4819172214371ed820e8c6
commit 7f2043399809c0ba5c4819172214371ed820e8c6
Author: Rainer Orth <ro@CeBiTec.Uni-Bielefeld.DE>
Date: Mon May 18 17:56:00 2020 +0200
Remove unused ps_lgetLDT etc. on Solaris/x86 [PR25981]
As reported in PR build/25981, a future Solaris 11.4 update will soon
remove the short i386 register names like SS etc. from <sys/regset.h>.
They could leak into user code (e.g. via <signal.h> -> <sys/signal.h> ->
<sys/ucontext.h>) and pollute the user namespace. Affected code would
have a hard time avoiding the issue: LLVM is one of those.
While the short names are required to be present by the i386 psABI, that
document only demands that they exist in <ucontext.h>, which is what the
upcoming update assures.
With this change, in a 64-bit-default configuration, procfs.c fails to
compile on Solaris/x86:
/vol/src/gnu/gdb/hg/master/git/gdb/procfs.c: In function 'ssd*
procfs_find_LDT_entry(ptid_t)':
/vol/src/gnu/gdb/hg/master/git/gdb/procfs.c:1643:18: error: 'GS' was not
declared in this scope
1643 | key = (*gregs)[GS] & 0xffff;
| ^~
make[2]: *** [Makefile:1607: procfs.o] Error 1
Initially I meant to provide a definition using the planned replacement
macro, but closer inspection revealed a better way. procfs_find_LDT_entry
and its helper proc_get_LDT_entry are only used to implement ps_lgetLDT,
one of the callback functions required by libthread_db.so.1
(cf. <proc_service.h>). While that function is still documented as being
required even in Solaris 11.4, I found that calls to it had been removed
long ago in Solaris 9, so just removing the three functions above is the
easiest fix.
The following patch does just that. It compiled successfully on
amd64-pc-solaris2.11, however, as reported in PR gdb/25939, master is
completely broken on Solaris since the multi-target patch. The patch
applies cleanly to the gdb-9 branch and there I could test it
successfully.
PR build/25981
* procfs.c [(__i386__ || __x86_64__) && sun] (proc_get_LDT_entry,
procfs_find_LDT_entry): Remove.
* procfs.h [(__i386__ || __x86_64__) && sun] (struct ssd,
procfs_find_LDT_entry): Remove.
* sol-thread.c [(__i386__ || __x86_64__) && sun] (ps_lgetLDT):
Remove.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread* [Bug gdb/25939] [10 regression] run fails with ICE on Solaris
2020-05-07 11:11 [Bug gdb/25939] New: [10 regression] run fails with ICE on Solaris ro at gcc dot gnu.org
2020-05-07 11:11 ` [Bug gdb/25939] " ro at gcc dot gnu.org
2020-05-18 15:57 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2020-05-19 8:04 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
2020-06-14 1:44 ` brobecker at gnat dot com
` (5 subsequent siblings)
8 siblings, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2020-05-19 8:04 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gdb-prs
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25939
--- Comment #2 from cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org <cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
The gdb-9-branch branch has been updated by Rainer Orth <ro@sourceware.org>:
https://sourceware.org/git/gitweb.cgi?p=binutils-gdb.git;h=ff6da943781d65f7ebc8e2e5ab52fb85590ea60b
commit ff6da943781d65f7ebc8e2e5ab52fb85590ea60b
Author: Rainer Orth <ro@CeBiTec.Uni-Bielefeld.DE>
Date: Tue May 19 10:03:14 2020 +0200
Remove unused ps_lgetLDT etc. on Solaris/x86 [PR25981]
As reported in PR build/25981, a future Solaris 11.4 update will soon
remove the short i386 register names like SS etc. from <sys/regset.h>.
They could leak into user code (e.g. via <signal.h> -> <sys/signal.h> ->
<sys/ucontext.h>) and pollute the user namespace. Affected code would
have a hard time avoiding the issue: LLVM is one of those.
While the short names are required to be present by the i386 psABI, that
document only demands that they exist in <ucontext.h>, which is what the
upcoming update assures.
With this change, in a 64-bit-default configuration, procfs.c fails to
compile on Solaris/x86:
/vol/src/gnu/gdb/hg/master/git/gdb/procfs.c: In function 'ssd*
procfs_find_LDT_entry(ptid_t)':
/vol/src/gnu/gdb/hg/master/git/gdb/procfs.c:1643:18: error: 'GS' was not
declared in this scope
1643 | key = (*gregs)[GS] & 0xffff;
| ^~
make[2]: *** [Makefile:1607: procfs.o] Error 1
Initially I meant to provide a definition using the planned replacement
macro, but closer inspection revealed a better way. procfs_find_LDT_entry
and its helper proc_get_LDT_entry are only used to implement ps_lgetLDT,
one of the callback functions required by libthread_db.so.1
(cf. <proc_service.h>). While that function is still documented as being
required even in Solaris 11.4, I found that calls to it had been removed
long ago in Solaris 9, so just removing the three functions above is the
easiest fix.
The following patch does just that. It compiled successfully on
amd64-pc-solaris2.11, however, as reported in PR gdb/25939, master is
completely broken on Solaris since the multi-target patch. The patch
applies cleanly to the gdb-9 branch and there I could test it
successfully.
PR build/25981
* procfs.c [(__i386__ || __x86_64__) && sun] (proc_get_LDT_entry,
procfs_find_LDT_entry): Remove.
* procfs.h [(__i386__ || __x86_64__) && sun] (struct ssd,
procfs_find_LDT_entry): Remove.
* sol-thread.c [(__i386__ || __x86_64__) && sun] (ps_lgetLDT):
Remove.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread* [Bug gdb/25939] [10 regression] run fails with ICE on Solaris
2020-05-07 11:11 [Bug gdb/25939] New: [10 regression] run fails with ICE on Solaris ro at gcc dot gnu.org
` (2 preceding siblings ...)
2020-05-19 8:04 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2020-06-14 1:44 ` brobecker at gnat dot com
2020-06-14 15:12 ` ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE
` (4 subsequent siblings)
8 siblings, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: brobecker at gnat dot com @ 2020-06-14 1:44 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gdb-prs
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25939
Joel Brobecker <brobecker at gnat dot com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Assignee|unassigned at sourceware dot org |ro at gcc dot gnu.org
CC| |brobecker at gnat dot com
--- Comment #3 from Joel Brobecker <brobecker at gnat dot com> ---
Hi Rainer,
Assigning this one to you, since you seem to be on it.
I see that you already pushed some changes for this PR. Does it mean we can now
close it, or do you think there is still work to be done on that one?
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread* [Bug gdb/25939] [10 regression] run fails with ICE on Solaris
2020-05-07 11:11 [Bug gdb/25939] New: [10 regression] run fails with ICE on Solaris ro at gcc dot gnu.org
` (3 preceding siblings ...)
2020-06-14 1:44 ` brobecker at gnat dot com
@ 2020-06-14 15:12 ` ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE
2020-06-21 16:34 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
` (3 subsequent siblings)
8 siblings, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE @ 2020-06-14 15:12 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gdb-prs
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25939
--- Comment #4 from Rainer Orth <ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE> ---
> --- Comment #3 from Joel Brobecker <brobecker at gnat dot com> ---
> Hi Rainer,
>
> Assigning this one to you, since you seem to be on it.
At least a bit, though I haven't made much progress. Besides, I got
distracted by the GCC 10 release process, among others.
> I see that you already pushed some changes for this PR. Does it mean we can now
> close it, or do you think there is still work to be done on that one?
The two are unrelated: those patches were for compilation failures
affecting only the very latest Solaris 11.4 updates. This bug is about
the failure to run a program on any Solaris version, caused by the
multi-target merge.
What I've found so far is that in thread.c (add_thread_silent) the call
to find_inferior_ptid returns NULL because the all_inferiors (targ)
iterator comes up empty.
Looking further, in add_thread_silent, I see
m_target_stack = {m_top = file_stratum, m_stack = {0x20190e0
<the_dummy_target>, 0x200b8c0 <exec_ops>, 0x0, 0x0, 0x0, 0x0, 0x0}}}
i.e. the_procfs_target is missing while Linux/x86_64 has (among others)
the_amd64_linux_nat_target.
I managed to get a bit further with this patch:
diff --git a/gdb/procfs.c b/gdb/procfs.c
--- a/gdb/procfs.c
+++ b/gdb/procfs.c
@@ -3086,6 +3090,9 @@ procfs_target::create_inferior (const ch
shell_file = tryname;
}
+ if (!target_is_pushed (this))
+ push_target (this);
+
pid = fork_inferior (exec_file, allargs, env, procfs_set_exec_trap,
NULL, NULL, shell_file, NULL);
However, now the startup fails with
procfs: couldn't find pid 0 in procinfo list.
procfs: init_inferior, open_proc_files line 2878, /proc/6031: No such file or
directory.
I haven't got any further yet, unfortunately.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread* [Bug gdb/25939] [10 regression] run fails with ICE on Solaris
2020-05-07 11:11 [Bug gdb/25939] New: [10 regression] run fails with ICE on Solaris ro at gcc dot gnu.org
` (4 preceding siblings ...)
2020-06-14 15:12 ` ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE
@ 2020-06-21 16:34 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
2020-06-22 10:18 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
` (2 subsequent siblings)
8 siblings, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2020-06-21 16:34 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gdb-prs
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25939
--- Comment #5 from cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org <cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
The master branch has been updated by Rainer Orth <ro@sourceware.org>:
https://sourceware.org/git/gitweb.cgi?p=binutils-gdb.git;h=cf6f3e86ded2cd950f59a0f2c164f2c953ef534b
commit cf6f3e86ded2cd950f59a0f2c164f2c953ef534b
Author: Rainer Orth <ro@CeBiTec.Uni-Bielefeld.DE>
Date: Sun Jun 21 18:32:27 2020 +0200
[PR gdb/25939] Move push_target call earlier in procfs.c
Since the multi-target patch, the run command fails on Solaris with an
assertion failure even for a trivial program:
$ ./gdb -D ./data-directory ./hello
GNU gdb (GDB) 10.0.50.20200106-git
[...]
Reading symbols from ./hello...
(gdb) run
Starting program: /vol/obj/gnu/gdb/gdb/reghunt/no-resync/122448/gdb/hello
/vol/src/gnu/gdb/hg/master/reghunt/gdb/thread.c:336: internal-error:
thread_info::thread_info(inferior*, ptid_t): Assertion `inf_ != NULL'
failed.
Here's the start of the corresponding stack trace:
#0 internal_error (
file=file@entry=0x966150
"/vol/src/gnu/gdb/hg/master/reghunt/gdb/thread.c", line=line@entry=336,
fmt=0x9ddb94 "%s: Assertion `%s' failed.")
at /vol/src/gnu/gdb/hg/master/reghunt/gdb/gdbsupport/errors.c:51
#1 0x0000000000ef81f4 in thread_info::thread_info (this=0x1212020,
inf_=<optimized out>, ptid_=...)
at /vol/src/gnu/gdb/hg/master/reghunt/gdb/thread.c:344
#2 0x0000000000ef82cd in new_thread (inf=inf@entry=0x0, ptid=...)
at /vol/src/gnu/gdb/hg/master/reghunt/gdb/thread.c:239
#3 0x0000000000efac3c in add_thread_silent (
targ=targ@entry=0x11b0940 <the_procfs_target>, ptid=...)
at /vol/src/gnu/gdb/hg/master/reghunt/gdb/thread.c:304
#4 0x0000000000d90692 in procfs_target::create_inferior (
this=0x11b0940 <the_procfs_target>,
exec_file=0x13dbef0
"/vol/obj/gnu/gdb/gdb/reghunt/no-resync/122448/gdb/hello", allargs="",
env=0x13c48f0, from_tty=<optimized out>)
at /vol/src/gnu/gdb/hg/master/reghunt/gdb/gdbsupport/ptid.h:47
#5 0x0000000000c84e64 in run_command_1 (args=<optimized out>, from_tty=1,
run_how=run_how@entry=RUN_NORMAL)
at /vol/gcc-9/include/c++/9.1.0/bits/basic_string.h:263
#6 0x0000000000c85007 in run_command (args=<optimized out>,
from_tty=<optimized out>)
at /vol/src/gnu/gdb/hg/master/reghunt/gdb/infcmd.c:687
Looking closer, I found that in add_thread_silent as called from
procfs.c (procfs_target::create_inferior) find_inferior_ptid returns
NULL. The all_inferiors (targ) iterator comes up empty.
Going from there, I see that in add_thread_silent
m_target_stack = {m_top = file_stratum, m_stack = {0x20190e0
<the_dummy_target>, 0x200b8c0 <exec_ops>, 0x0, 0x0, 0x0, 0x0, 0x0}}}
i.e. the_procfs_target is missing compared to the_amd64_linux_nat_target
on Linux/x86_64.
Moving the push_target call earlier allows debugging to get over the
initial assertion failure. I run instead into
procfs: couldn't find pid 0 in procinfo list.
which is fixed by
https://sourceware.org/pipermail/gdb-patches/2020-June/169674.html
Both patches tested together on amd64-pc-solaris2.11.
PR gdb/25939
* procfs.c (procfs_target::procfs_init_inferior): Move push_target
call ...
(procfs_target::create_inferior): ... here.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread* [Bug gdb/25939] [10 regression] run fails with ICE on Solaris
2020-05-07 11:11 [Bug gdb/25939] New: [10 regression] run fails with ICE on Solaris ro at gcc dot gnu.org
` (5 preceding siblings ...)
2020-06-21 16:34 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2020-06-22 10:18 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
2020-06-22 10:20 ` palves at redhat dot com
2020-06-22 18:19 ` brobecker at gnat dot com
8 siblings, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2020-06-22 10:18 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gdb-prs
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25939
--- Comment #6 from cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org <cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
The master branch has been updated by Pedro Alves <palves@sourceware.org>:
https://sourceware.org/git/gitweb.cgi?p=binutils-gdb.git;h=f809832224cc45eb58812f6d4bb03cbf52fad980
commit f809832224cc45eb58812f6d4bb03cbf52fad980
Author: Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>
Date: Mon Jun 22 10:54:08 2020 +0100
Solaris, target_wait(), don't rely on inferior_ptid
Debugging on Solaris is broken, with the procfs target backend failing
with:
procfs: couldn't find pid 0 in procinfo list.
as soon as you start a program.
The problem is procfs_target::wait assuming that inferior_ptid is
meaningful on entry, but, since the multi-target series, inferior_ptid
is null_ptid before we call target_wait, in infrun.c:
static ptid_t
do_target_wait_1 (inferior *inf, ptid_t ptid,
target_waitstatus *status, int options)
{
...
/* We know that we are looking for an event in the target of inferior
INF, but we don't know which thread the event might come from. As
such we want to make sure that INFERIOR_PTID is reset so that none
of
the wait code relies on it - doing so is always a mistake. */
switch_to_inferior_no_thread (inf);
This patch tweaks the backend to remove the assumption that
inferior_ptid points at something. sol-thread.c (the thread_stratum
that sits on top of procfs.c) also has the same issue.
Some spots in procfs_target::wait were returning
TARGET_WAITKIND_SPURIOUS+inferior_ptid. This commit replaces those
with waiting again without returning to the core. This fixes the
relying on inferior_ptid, and also should fix the issue discussed
here:
https://sourceware.org/pipermail/gdb/2020-May/048616.html
https://sourceware.org/pipermail/gdb/2020-June/048660.html
gdb/ChangeLog:
2020-06-22 Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>
PR gdb/25939
* procfs.c (procfs_target::wait): Don't reference inferior_ptid.
Use the current inferior instead. Don't return
TARGET_WAITKIND_SPURIOUS/inferior_ptid -- instead continue and
wait again.
* sol-thread.c (sol_thread_target::wait): Don't reference
inferior_ptid.
(ps_lgetregs, ps_lsetregs, ps_lgetfpregs, ps_lsetfpregs)
(sol_update_thread_list_callback): Use the current inferior's pid
instead of inferior_ptid.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread* [Bug gdb/25939] [10 regression] run fails with ICE on Solaris
2020-05-07 11:11 [Bug gdb/25939] New: [10 regression] run fails with ICE on Solaris ro at gcc dot gnu.org
` (6 preceding siblings ...)
2020-06-22 10:18 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2020-06-22 10:20 ` palves at redhat dot com
2020-06-22 18:19 ` brobecker at gnat dot com
8 siblings, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: palves at redhat dot com @ 2020-06-22 10:20 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gdb-prs
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25939
Pedro Alves <palves at redhat dot com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC| |palves at redhat dot com
Resolution|--- |FIXED
--- Comment #7 from Pedro Alves <palves at redhat dot com> ---
Fixes pushed.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread* [Bug gdb/25939] [10 regression] run fails with ICE on Solaris
2020-05-07 11:11 [Bug gdb/25939] New: [10 regression] run fails with ICE on Solaris ro at gcc dot gnu.org
` (7 preceding siblings ...)
2020-06-22 10:20 ` palves at redhat dot com
@ 2020-06-22 18:19 ` brobecker at gnat dot com
8 siblings, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: brobecker at gnat dot com @ 2020-06-22 18:19 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gdb-prs
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25939
--- Comment #8 from Joel Brobecker <brobecker at gnat dot com> ---
Just a quick note to say Thank You to both of you guys. You rock :).
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread