This is the mail archive of the mailing list for the GDB project.

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

[RFA] skip_prologue_sal and sal expansion

A couple of cleanups in breakpoint.c. Let me give some background
first; consider the following program:

int counter = 42;

inline void
callee ()
  counter = 0; /* set breakpoint in an inlined function.  */

caller ()
  callee ();

main ()
  caller ();
  callee ();
  return counter;

When callee is inlined, we have three occurence for the line
"counter = 0;": inlined in caller, inlined in main, and not inlined.
When a breakpoint is set on this line, GDB sets a breakpoint on 3

(gdb) l p.c:6
1       int counter = 42;
3       inline void
4       callee ()
5       {
6         counter = 0;
7       }
9       void
10      caller ()
(gdb) b 6
Breakpoint 1 at 0x1800074: file p.c, line 6. (3 locations)

I have recently hit a bug in an assembler which was optimizing out the
prologue line info; it was making GDB think that the line
"counter = 0;" was a part of callee's prologue. And this pointed me to
something strange in GDB.

After having used this bogus assembler to generate my program, if I try
to set a breakpoint at line "counter = 0;", I end up with only one
occurence instead of three:

(gdb) b 6  
Breakpoint 1 at 0x1800074: file p.c, line 6.

The problem was in skip_prologue_sal defined in breakpoint.c. When it
actually skips a prologue, it does not assure that the other sal's
fields (explicit_pc and explicit_line) are left unchanged. In my case,
it was accidently changing explicit_line from 1 to 0. This change
disabled the line sal expansion, and in consequence we ended up with
the breakpoint set in only one location. I think that it's a bug in
skip_prologue_sal, this function should not change mess with these

Now, if I change skip_prologue_sal to copy explicit_line and
explicit_pc, the line expansion is done; but we should make sure that
prologue is skipped similarly, otherwise we get an assertion failure
when the address returned by resolve_sal_pc cannot be found after
line sal expansion:

(gdb) break p.c:6
../../src/gdb/breakpoint.c:5113: internal-error: expand_line_sal_maybe:
Assertion `found' failed.

Patch attached, tested on x86-linux. OK to apply?

2009-06-02  Jerome Guitton  <>

	* breakpoint.c (expand_line_sal_maybe): When explicit_line,
	skip prologue on each sals.
	(skip_prologue_sal): Return explicit_line and explicit_pc
Index: breakpoint.c
--- breakpoint.c	(revision 148760)
+++ breakpoint.c	(working copy)
@@ -207,6 +207,9 @@ static void disable_trace_command (char 
 static void trace_pass_command (char *, int);
+static void skip_prologue_sal (struct symtab_and_line *sal);
 /* Flag indicating that a command has proceeded the inferior past the
    current breakpoint.  */
@@ -5412,6 +5415,15 @@ expand_line_sal_maybe (struct symtab_and
+  else
+    {
+      for (i = 0; i < expanded.nelts; ++i)
+	{
+	  /* If this SAL corresponds to a breakpoint inserted using a
+	     line number, then skip the function prologue if necessary.  */
+	  skip_prologue_sal (&expanded.sals[i]);
+	}
+    }
   if (expanded.nelts <= 1)
@@ -5896,7 +5908,8 @@ set_breakpoint (char *address, char *con
 /* Adjust SAL to the first instruction past the function prologue.
    The end of the prologue is determined using the line table from
-   the debugging information.
+   the debugging information.  explicit_pc and explicit_line are
+   not modified.
    If SAL is already past the prologue, then do nothing.  */
@@ -5911,7 +5924,11 @@ skip_prologue_sal (struct symtab_and_lin
   start_sal = find_function_start_sal (sym, 1);
   if (sal->pc < start_sal.pc)
-    *sal = start_sal;
+    {
+      start_sal.explicit_line = sal->explicit_line;
+      start_sal.explicit_pc = sal->explicit_pc;
+      *sal = start_sal;
+    }
 /* Helper function for break_command_1 and disassemble_command.  */

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]