This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sourceware.org
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: [patch] Use displaced stepping regardless of SW single step
- From: Yao Qi <yao at codesourcery dot com>
- To: gdb-patches at sourceware dot org
- Date: Mon, 05 Sep 2011 17:19:27 +0800
- Subject: Re: [patch] Use displaced stepping regardless of SW single step
- References: <4E63830D.9060604@codesourcery.com>
On 09/04/2011 09:54 PM, Yao Qi wrote:
Regression tested on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu with displaced stepping
"auto" and "on" respectively. No extra failures, but there are two
PASSes changed to KFAILs,
-PASS: gdb.cp/annota2.exp: watch triggered on a.x
+KFAIL: gdb.cp/annota2.exp: watch triggered on a.x (PRMS: gdb/38)
-PASS: gdb.cp/annota3.exp: watch triggered on a.x
+KFAIL: gdb.cp/annota3.exp: watch triggered on a.x (PRMS: gdb/38)
I am not familiar with this case, so can't tell this is caused by my patch.
I made a mistake when comparing gdb.sum, and I run testsuite again this
morning, and get something different on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu,
- When displaced stepping is set to "auto", no regression.
- When displaced stepping is set to "on", there are some new fails,
* FAIL: gdb.base/ending-run.exp: step to end of run
The test case doesn't match the output, while the output is correct.
* FAIL: gdb.base/gdb1555.exp: Step into shared lib function
FAIL: gdb.base/gdb1555.exp: Next while in a shared lib function
FAIL: gdb.base/gnu-ifunc.exp: step
FAIL: gdb.base/gnu-ifunc.exp: continue to break-at-nextcall
FAIL: gdb.base/gnu-ifunc.exp: continue to breakpoint: nextcall
gnu_ifunc
FAIL: gdb.base/gnu-ifunc.exp: nextcall gnu_ifunc skipped
These fails are caused by SIGSEGV in gdb, which shows some
potential bugs in x86 displaced stepping.
* FAIL: gdb.base/watch-vfork.exp: Watchpoint triggers after vfork (sw)
FAIL: gdb.threads/pending-step.exp: next in multiple threads with
breakpoints (timeout)
They are similar to the problems (#4 and #5) I found on arm
(posted http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2011-08/msg00609.html), and
I'll post other patches to fix them.
-&& (tp->control.trap_expected
- || (step&& gdbarch_software_single_step_p (gdbarch)))
+&& (tp->control.trap_expected || step))
There is an extra ")" added by mistake when I am adding changelog entry
for this patch. Here is the right one.
--
Yao (éå)
gdb/
* infrun.c (resume): Use displaced stepping regardless of supporting
software single step.
---
gdb/infrun.c | 3 +--
1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/gdb/infrun.c b/gdb/infrun.c
index 7886cce..40e1d71 100644
--- a/gdb/infrun.c
+++ b/gdb/infrun.c
@@ -1733,8 +1733,7 @@ a command like `return' or `jump' to continue execution."));
event, displaced stepping breaks the vfork child similarly as single
step software breakpoint. */
if (use_displaced_stepping (gdbarch)
- && (tp->control.trap_expected
- || (step && gdbarch_software_single_step_p (gdbarch)))
+ && (tp->control.trap_expected || step)
&& sig == TARGET_SIGNAL_0
&& !current_inferior ()->waiting_for_vfork_done)
{
--
1.7.0.4