[Bug gdb/29996] New: [gdb/reverse] Reverse stepping skips first line in function in optimized code

["vries at gcc dot gnu.org" <sourceware-bugzilla@sourceware.org>]

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29996

            Bug ID: 29996
           Summary: [gdb/reverse] Reverse stepping skips first line in
                    function in optimized code
           Product: gdb
           Version: HEAD
            Status: NEW
          Severity: normal
          Priority: P2
         Component: gdb
          Assignee: unassigned at sourceware dot org
          Reporter: vries at gcc dot gnu.org
  Target Milestone: ---

Consider test-case test.c:
...
$ cat -n test.c
     1  int i, j, k;
     2  int x, y, z;
     3
     4  void __attribute__((noinline, noclone))
     5  foo (void)
     6  {
     7    i = x;
     8    j = y;
     9    k = z;
    10  }
    11
    12  int
    13  main (void)
    14  {
    15    foo ();
    16    return 0;
    17  }
...

Compiled with -O2 (using gcc 7.5.0):
...
$ gcc -g -O2 test.c
...

Let's step through the program, while recording:
...
$ gdb -q a.out -ex start -ex record
Reading symbols from a.out...
Temporary breakpoint 1 at 0x4003c0: file test.c, line 15.
Starting program: a.out 

Temporary breakpoint 1, main () at test.c:15
15        foo ();
(gdb) step
foo () at test.c:7
7         i = x;
(gdb) step
8         j = y;
(gdb) step
9         k = z;
(gdb) step
10      }
(gdb) 
...

So far, so good.

Now let's try reverse stepping:
...
10      }
(gdb) reverse-step
9         k = z;
(gdb) reverse-step
8         j = y;
(gdb) reverse-step

No more reverse-execution history.
main () at test.c:15
15        foo ();
(gdb) 
...

Hmm, why did we skip over line 7?

Minimal reproducer:
...
$ gdb -q -batch a.out -ex start -ex record -ex "break 8" -ex continue \
  -ex reverse-step
Temporary breakpoint 1 at 0x4003c0: file test.c, line 15.

Temporary breakpoint 1, main () at test.c:15
15        foo ();
Breakpoint 2 at 0x4004bc: file test.c, line 8.

Breakpoint 2, foo () at test.c:8
8         j = y;

No more reverse-execution history.
main () at test.c:15
15        foo ();
...

It's because of this piece of code:
...
      /* When stepping backward, stop at beginning of line range                
         (unless it's the function entry point, in which case                   
         keep going back to the call point).  */
      CORE_ADDR stop_pc = ecs->event_thread->stop_pc ();
      if (stop_pc == ecs->event_thread->control.step_range_start
          && stop_pc != ecs->stop_func_start
          && execution_direction == EXEC_REVERSE)
        end_stepping_range (ecs);
      else
        keep_going (ecs);
...
which does the wrong thing for optimized code.

For forward execution, the relevant logic is in skip_prologue_sal, see the
locations_valid () test.

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