[PATCH][gdb] Fix gdb.arch/amd64-tailcall-*.exp with -fPIE/-pie
Pedro Alves
palves@redhat.com
Fri Aug 9 17:38:00 GMT 2019
On 8/9/19 4:03 PM, Tom de Vries wrote:
>
> +/* Given an unrelocated address ADDR belonging to the text section of OBJFILE,
> + return the relocated address. */
> +
> +static CORE_ADDR
> +relocate_text_addr (CORE_ADDR addr, struct objfile *objfile)
> +{
> + CORE_ADDR baseaddr
> + = ANOFFSET (objfile->section_offsets, SECT_OFF_TEXT (objfile));
> + struct gdbarch *gdbarch = get_objfile_arch (objfile);
> + addr = gdbarch_adjust_dwarf2_addr (gdbarch, addr + baseaddr);
> + return addr;
I'd write:
return gdbarch_adjust_dwarf2_addr (gdbarch, addr + baseaddr);
> +}
> +
> /* Find PC to be unwound from THIS_FRAME. THIS_FRAME must be a part of
> CACHE. */
>
> @@ -240,14 +255,25 @@ pretend_pc (struct frame_info *this_frame, struct tailcall_cache *cache)
> gdb_assert (next_levels >= 0);
>
> if (next_levels < chain->callees)
> - return chain->call_site[chain->length - next_levels - 1]->pc;
> + {
> + struct call_site *call_site
> + = chain->call_site[chain->length - next_levels - 1];
> + struct objfile *objfile = call_site->per_cu->dwarf2_per_objfile->objfile;
> + return relocate_text_addr (call_site->pc, objfile);
> + }
> next_levels -= chain->callees;
>
> /* Otherwise CHAIN->CALLEES are already covered by CHAIN->CALLERS. */
> if (chain->callees != chain->length)
> {
> if (next_levels < chain->callers)
> - return chain->call_site[chain->callers - next_levels - 1]->pc;
> + {
> + struct call_site *call_site
> + = chain->call_site[chain->callers - next_levels - 1];
> + struct objfile *objfile
> + = call_site->per_cu->dwarf2_per_objfile->objfile;
> + return relocate_text_addr (call_site->pc, objfile);
> + }
That seems fine, but it seems you could have factored out more, like:
static CORE_ADDR
call_site_relocated_pc (struct call_site *call_site)
{
struct objfile *objfile
= call_site->per_cu->dwarf2_per_objfile->objfile;
CORE_ADDR baseaddr
= ANOFFSET (objfile->section_offsets, SECT_OFF_TEXT (objfile));
struct gdbarch *gdbarch = get_objfile_arch (objfile);
return gdbarch_adjust_dwarf2_addr (gdbarch, call_size->pc + baseaddr);
}
Then the other hunks would look like:
struct call_site *call_site
= chain->call_site[chain->length - next_levels - 1];
return call_site_relocated_pc (call_site);
...
struct call_site *call_site
= chain->call_site[chain->callers - next_levels - 1];
return call_site_relocated_pc (call_site);
call_site_relocated_pc could even be a method of struct call_site, I guess,
so you'd write:
return call_site->relocated_pc ();
Any reason you didn't do something like that?
Thanks,
Pedro Alves
More information about the Gdb-patches
mailing list