This is the mail archive of the
glibc-bugs@sourceware.org
mailing list for the glibc project.
[Bug libc/15868] New: backtrace interfaces and calls to noreturn functions
- From: "jsm28 at gcc dot gnu.org" <sourceware-bugzilla at sourceware dot org>
- To: glibc-bugs at sourceware dot org
- Date: Tue, 20 Aug 2013 20:13:40 +0000
- Subject: [Bug libc/15868] New: backtrace interfaces and calls to noreturn functions
- Auto-submitted: auto-generated
http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15868
Bug ID: 15868
Summary: backtrace interfaces and calls to noreturn functions
Product: glibc
Version: 2.18
Status: NEW
Severity: normal
Priority: P2
Component: libc
Assignee: unassigned at sourceware dot org
Reporter: jsm28 at gcc dot gnu.org
CC: drepper.fsp at gmail dot com
Created attachment 7155
--> http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=7155&action=edit
Testcase
The backtrace / backtrace_symbols / backtrace_symbols_fd interfaces do not work
well when backtracing through calls to noreturn functions (a natural use case -
a noreturn error-handling function might reasonably wish to print a backtrace).
This is illustrated by the attached testcase on x86_64. At least with some GCC
versions, the call to a noreturn function has return address pointing to
padding after the end of the calling function, meaning that it does not point
inside that function and so a name for it cannot be found.
The backtrace interface is that the addresses are return addresses. But
reliable backtracing requires additional information about whether frames are
signal frame, in which case the return address points inside the relevant
function, or not, in which case you should subtract 1 to be sure of being
inside the relevant function. (That involves calling _Unwind_GetIPInfo instead
of _Unwind_GetIP to get the relevant information.) So to support this case
reliably, there should be new interfaces that handle this adjustment in some
way.
(Old discussion started at:
http://www.eglibc.org/archives/patches/msg01077.html .)
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.