This is the mail archive of the
gdb@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: ignore helper no longer works?
- From: "Jafa" <jafa at silicondust dot com>
- To: "Andrew Cagney" <ac131313 at redhat dot com>
- Cc: <gdb at sources dot redhat dot com>
- Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2003 10:25:36 -0700
- Subject: Re: ignore helper no longer works?
- References: <00db01c3410a$684b0050$0a02a8c0@scenix.com> <3F044768.6090403@redhat.com>
- Reply-to: "Jafa" <jafa at silicondust dot com>
Hi Andrew,
>- When stepping, the need to identify and single step through
>trampolines / helpers.
I have updated the backtrace code so that if it detects that it is in an
epilogue stub then return a frame with no known return address (0) and no
known FP (0).
I can probably work out the FP of the previous function if need be, but have
no hope (without some simulation) of figuring out the return address.
Step-over at the end of a fucntion results in gdb running without stopping
(and it doesn't call ignore_helper).
One way to address this problem would be for gdb to call ignore_helper, and
then know not attempt a stack-backtrace.
Another solution (ok, crude hack) would be for the tdep to cache the last
known PC so that if it steps into a stub then it knows where it came from.
>- When stopped, the need to back trace out of a trampoline / helper.
I think it is accceptable not being able to do a backtrace if you are in an
epilogue helper.... the code now returns that the FP and PC are unknown to
abort the backtrace.
I am open to ideas (I figure this must be a rare but general problem). If
all else fails I will implement the crude hack above because I need to get
this working.
Thanks
Nick
----- Original Message -----
From: "Andrew Cagney" <ac131313@redhat.com>
To: "Jafa" <jafa@silicondust.com>
Cc: <gdb@sources.redhat.com>
Sent: Thursday, July 03, 2003 8:10 AM
Subject: Re: ignore helper no longer works?
> 1) Say it is my responsibility to determine the return address anywhere in
> code, even if it means writing a whole lot of code in gdb to simulate the
> execution of these stubs.
>
> 2) Fix gdb at a higher level so that it doesn't try to obtain a return
> address from a helper function - instead keep stepping (like it gdb used
to
> do).
Sounds like you've got two problems:
- When stepping, the need to identify and single step through
trampolines / helpers.
- When stopped, the need to back trace out of a trampoline / helper.
Given a core file, it isn't possible to `step'. Your unwinder is going
to need to identify and dig itself out of that hole. Main thing to do
is to not lie - from what I understand of your case, given a callee that
jumped to a helper, you'll end up displaying:
<helper>
caller
Andrew
> I can figure out the FP ok (all be it that it is painful without being
able
> to see the prologue) - the old system only asked for the FP and after
> detecting that it was the same frame, kept stepping.
>
> BTW - I have also noticed that gdb now does not call ignore_helper for any
> step-over operations, instead relying on the tdep to supply the return
> address for the stub. It think it always used to call ignore_helper and if
> it was a helper then it stepped rather that setting a breakpoint as if it
> was a function.
>
> I don't want to be too quick to butcher infrun - I would appreciate your
> advice.