| Summary: | readelf misinterprets register rule inheritance from CIE to FDE | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | binutils | Reporter: | Vsevolod Alekseyev <sevaa> |
| Component: | binutils | Assignee: | Not yet assigned to anyone <unassigned> |
| Status: | RESOLVED DUPLICATE | ||
| Severity: | normal | ||
| Priority: | P2 | ||
| Version: | 2.39 | ||
| Target Milestone: | --- | ||
| Host: | Target: | ||
| Build: | Last reconfirmed: | ||
| Attachments: | Test binary | ||
Created attachment 14154 [details] Test binary Consider the debug info attached binary. The binary's first FDE in .eh_frame has initial_location 0x1060, and the following instructions: DW_CFA_advance_loc 4 # Move PC by 4 DW_CFA_undefined 16 # Change the rule for R16 to undefined The linked CIE marks R16 as the return address, and has the following instructions: DW_CFA_def_cfa 7, 8 # CFA is at R7+8 DW_CFA_offset 16, 1 # Set the rule for R16 to [CFA+1*data_aligment_factor]) The GNU readelf, if executed with --debug-dump=frames-interp, dumps the FDE as follows: 00000018 0000000000000014 0000001c FDE cie=00000000 pc=0000000000001060..0000000000001086 LOC CFA ra 0000000000001060 rsp+8 u 0000000000001064 rsp+8 u Meanwhile, an alternative parser thinks that at the range [0x1060-0x1064), the rule for RA/R16 should be as inherited from the CIE, and it goes c-8. I've debugged readelf (the latest master, as of 06/01/22), to that point. There are two passes over the FDE instructions: one starting on dwarf.c:9296, the other starting at dwarf.c:9442. On the first pass, when DW_CFA_undefined is encountered, there is the following case statement: READ_ULEB (reg, start, block_end); if (frame_need_space (fc, reg) >= 0) fc->col_type[reg] = DW_CFA_undefined; break; If I understand correctly, the intended purpose of the first pass is to allocate enough memory in the fc->col_type and fc->col_offset arrays, and the logic of this operator's handling was meant to be: if this register was not mentioned before, allocate space for it, and reset its rule to undefined. HOWEVER, if the register WAS mentioned before (e. g. in the CIE), frame_need_space() returns 0, and the if() body executes anyway, and resets the rule for the register to undefined, erasing the initial state as specified by the CIE. I think the if statement should go, instead, "if (frame_need_space (fc, reg) > 0)". Same for other register-rule-type operators on the first pass.