This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sourceware.org
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: [commit+7.5] [patchv2] Write bpt at the ON_STACK bpt address
- From: Sergio Durigan Junior <sergiodj at redhat dot com>
- To: Pedro Alves <palves at redhat dot com>
- Cc: Edjunior Barbosa Machado <emachado at linux dot vnet dot ibm dot com>, Jan Kratochvil <jan dot kratochvil at redhat dot com>, Philippe Waroquiers <philippe dot waroquiers at skynet dot be>, Joel Brobecker <brobecker at adacore dot com>, gdb-patches at sourceware dot org, "Maciej W. Rozycki" <macro at codesourcery dot com>, Tom Tromey <tromey at redhat dot com>
- Date: Thu, 02 Aug 2012 22:47:17 -0300
- Subject: Re: [commit+7.5] [patchv2] Write bpt at the ON_STACK bpt address
- References: <5012B1B6.1030003@redhat.com> <1343339398.2258.119.camel@soleil> <20120727184633.GA14182@host2.jankratochvil.net> <20120731073643.GA18696@host2.jankratochvil.net> <501B03E4.1020209@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <m3vch0gacz.fsf@redhat.com> <501B2271.6030406@redhat.com>
On Thursday, August 02 2012, Pedro Alves wrote:
>>> Program received signal SIGTRAP, Trace/breakpoint trap.
>>> ../../gdb.git/gdb/frame.c:2396: internal-error: frame_cleanup_after_sniffer: Assertion `frame->prologue_cache == NULL' failed.
>>> A problem internal to GDB has been detected,
>>> FAIL: gdb.base/valgrind-infcall.exp: continue (GDB internal error)
>>> further debugging may prove unreliable.
>>> Quit this debugging session? (y or n) n
>>>
>>> With this error, gdb connection is closed and the testsuite gets stuck
>>> at this point.
>>
>> (Adding Tom to CC list).
>>
>> Thanks for the report.
>>
>> Just as an FYI (or For Our Information, rather),
>> http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2012-08/msg00075.html clearly fixes
>> the bug. I will keep an eye on this since I am interested as well.
>
> Curious. But is the cause the same? If something sending C-c to gdb at the "wrong" time?
Not sure, but apparently not. I just wanted to make the relation
between the patch and the problem clear. It is also worth noting that
the patch fixes only the internal error, but some failures still occur,
which is something else to be investigated.
--
Sergio