From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <sourceware-bugzilla@sourceware.org>
Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48)
 id 757573857820; Fri, 29 Jul 2022 13:46:21 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 757573857820
From: "vries at gcc dot gnu.org" <sourceware-bugzilla@sourceware.org>
To: gdb-prs@sourceware.org
Subject: [Bug mi/29426] FAIL: gdb.mi/mi-var-invalidate.exp: linteger not
 anymore in scope due to binary changes (unexpected output)
Date: Fri, 29 Jul 2022 13:46:21 +0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gdb
X-Bugzilla-Component: mi
X-Bugzilla-Version: HEAD
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: 
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: vries at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW
X-Bugzilla-Resolution: 
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P2
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at sourceware dot org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: ---
X-Bugzilla-Flags: 
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: 
Message-ID: <bug-29426-4717-tMvvG3hgd8@http.sourceware.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-29426-4717@http.sourceware.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-29426-4717@http.sourceware.org/bugzilla/>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Bugzilla-URL: http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-BeenThere: gdb-prs@sourceware.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Gdb-prs mailing list <gdb-prs.sourceware.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://sourceware.org/mailman/options/gdb-prs>,
 <mailto:gdb-prs-request@sourceware.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://sourceware.org/pipermail/gdb-prs/>
List-Help: <mailto:gdb-prs-request@sourceware.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://sourceware.org/mailman/listinfo/gdb-prs>,
 <mailto:gdb-prs-request@sourceware.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 29 Jul 2022 13:46:21 -0000

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D29426

--- Comment #7 from Tom de Vries <vries at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Lancelot SIX from comment #6)
> Hi
>=20
> This is what I also see.  TBH, I am really wondering why I have not seen
> with my testing and with my ubuntu boxes.
>=20

It's PIE vs. no-PIE (and not for the first time ;) ).

So my system has no-PIE by default (because I haven't installed the gcc-PIE
package).

Using target board unix/-fPIE/-pie (case PIE), the test passes.  Using unix
(case no-PIE), it fails.

On ubuntu, there's a PIE default for system gcc.  When you build gcc from
scratch, it probably had no-PIE default instead.

Anyway, in one case (no-PIE) var_create succeeds, in the other (PIE) not.

So, varobj_create calls get_frame_block, which calls block_for_pc, with a
relocated pc.  Then block_for_pc calls block_for_pc_sect, which call
blockvector_for_pc_sect, which calls find_pc_sect_compunit_symtab, which ca=
lls
objf->find_pc_sect_compunit_symtab with objf =3D=3D mi-var-invalidate_bis.

In the PIE case, this query returns null because we try to find an relocated
address in an unrelocated objfile.

In the no-PIE case, this query returns non-null because we try to find an
non-relocatable address in an non-relocatable objfile.


In the PIE case

> I am working on a fix for this.
>=20
> Thanks for taking the time and looking into it.

--=20
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.=