| Age | Commit message (Collapse) | Author | Files | Lines |
|---|
|
This updates the copyright headers to include 2025. I did this by
running gdb/copyright.py and then manually modifying a few files as
noted by the script.
Approved-By: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>
|
|
This commit is the result of the following actions:
- Running gdb/copyright.py to update all of the copyright headers to
include 2024,
- Manually updating a few files the copyright.py script told me to
update, these files had copyright headers embedded within the
file,
- Regenerating gdbsupport/Makefile.in to refresh it's copyright
date,
- Using grep to find other files that still mentioned 2023. If
these files were updated last year from 2022 to 2023 then I've
updated them this year to 2024.
I'm sure I've probably missed some dates. Feel free to fix them up as
you spot them.
|
|
Add new gdb.threads/step-over-thread-exit.exp and
gdb.threads/step-over-thread-exit-while-stop-all-threads.exp
testcases, exercising stepping over thread exit syscall. These make
use of lib/my-syscalls.S to define the exit syscall.
Co-authored-by: Pedro Alves <pedro@palves.net>
Reviewed-By: Andrew Burgess <aburgess@redhat.com>
Bug: https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27338
Change-Id: Ie8b2c5747db99b7023463a897a8390d9e814a9c9
|
|
This commit is the result of running the gdb/copyright.py script,
which automated the update of the copyright year range for all
source files managed by the GDB project to be updated to include
year 2023.
|
|
This commit brings all the changes made by running gdb/copyright.py
as per GDB's Start of New Year Procedure.
For the avoidance of doubt, all changes in this commits were
performed by the script.
|
|
This commits the result of running gdb/copyright.py as per our Start
of New Year procedure...
gdb/ChangeLog
Update copyright year range in copyright header of all GDB files.
|
|
When a process does an exec, all its program space is replaced with the
newly loaded executable. All non-main threads disappear and the main
thread starts executing at the entry point of the new executable.
Things can go wrong if a displaced step operation is in progress while
we process the exec event.
If the main thread is the one executing the displaced step: when that
thread (now executing in the new executable) stops somewhere (say, at a
breakpoint), displaced_step_fixup will run and clear up the state. We
will execute the "fixup" phase for the instruction we single-stepped in
the old program space. We are now in a completely different context,
so doing the fixup may corrupt the state.
If it is a non-main thread that is doing the displaced step: while
handling the exec event, GDB deletes the thread_info representing that
thread (since the thread doesn't exist in the inferior after the exec).
But inferior::displaced_step_state::step_thread will still point to it.
When handling events later, this condition, in displaced_step_fixup,
will likely never be true:
/* Was this event for the thread we displaced? */
if (displaced->step_thread != event_thread)
return 0;
... since displaced->step_thread points to a deleted thread (unless that
storage gets re-used for a new thread_info, but that wouldn't be good
either). This effectively makes the displaced stepping buffer occupied
for ever. When a thread in the new program space will want to do a
displaced step, it will wait for ever.
I think we simply need to reset the displaced stepping state of the
inferior on exec. Everything execution-related that existed before the
exec is now gone.
Similarly, if a thread does an in-line step over an exec syscall
instruction, nothing clears the in-line step over info when the event is
handled. So it the in-line step over info stays there indefinitely, and
things hang because we can never start another step over. To fix this,
I added a call to clear_step_over_info in infrun_inferior_execd.
Add a test with a program with two threads that does an exec. The test
includes the following axes:
- whether it's the leader thread or the other thread that does the exec.
- whether the exec'r and exec'd program have different text segment
addresses. This is to hopefully catch cases where the displaced
stepping info doesn't get reset, and GDB later tries to restore bytes
of the old address space in the new address space. If the mapped
addresses are different, we should get some memory error. This
happens without the patch applied:
$ ./gdb -q -nx --data-directory=data-directory testsuite/outputs/gdb.threads/step-over-exec/step-over-exec-execr-thread-leader-diff-text-segs-true -ex "b main" -ex r -ex "b my_execve_syscall if 0" -ex "set displaced-stepping on"
...
Breakpoint 1, main (argc=1, argv=0x7fffffffde38) at /home/simark/src/binutils-gdb/gdb/testsuite/gdb.threads/step-over-exec.c:69
69 argv0 = argv[0];
Breakpoint 2 at 0x60133a: file /home/simark/src/binutils-gdb/gdb/testsuite/lib/my-syscalls.S, line 34.
(gdb) c
Continuing.
[New Thread 0x7ffff7c62640 (LWP 1455423)]
Leader going in exec.
Exec-ing /home/simark/build/binutils-gdb/gdb/testsuite/outputs/gdb.threads/step-over-exec/step-over-exec-execr-thread-leader-diff-text-segs-true-execd
[Thread 0x7ffff7c62640 (LWP 1455423) exited]
process 1455418 is executing new program: /home/simark/build/binutils-gdb/gdb/testsuite/outputs/gdb.threads/step-over-exec/step-over-exec-execr-thread-leader-diff-text-segs-true-execd
Error in re-setting breakpoint 2: Function "my_execve_syscall" not defined.
No unwaited-for children left.
(gdb) n
Single stepping until exit from function _start,
which has no line number information.
Cannot access memory at address 0x6010d2
(gdb)
- Whether displaced stepping is allowed or not, so that we end up
testing both displaced stepping and in-line stepping on arches that do
support displaced stepping (otherwise, it just tests in-line stepping
twice I suppose)
To be able to precisely put a breakpoint on the syscall instruction, I
added a small assembly file (lib/my-syscalls.S) that contains minimal
Linux syscall wrappers. I prefer that to the strategy used in
gdb.base/step-over-syscall.exp, which is to stepi into the glibc wrapper
until we find something that looks like a syscall instruction, I find
that more predictable.
gdb/ChangeLog:
* infrun.c (infrun_inferior_execd): New function.
(_initialize_infrun): Attach inferior_execd observer.
gdb/testsuite/ChangeLog:
* gdb.threads/step-over-exec.exp: New.
* gdb.threads/step-over-exec.c: New.
* gdb.threads/step-over-exec-execd.c: New.
* lib/my-syscalls.S: New.
* lib/my-syscalls.h: New.
Change-Id: I1bbc8538e683f53af5b980091849086f4fec5ff9
|
