[lldb-dev] [Bug 15938] New: LLDB on Linux incorrectly prints symbol name when a breakpoint on a libc function is hit

[bugzilla-daemon at llvm.org]

http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=15938

            Bug ID: 15938
           Summary: LLDB on Linux incorrectly prints symbol name when a
                    breakpoint on a libc function is hit
           Product: lldb
           Version: unspecified
          Hardware: PC
                OS: Linux
            Status: NEW
          Severity: normal
          Priority: P
         Component: All Bugs
          Assignee: lldb-dev at cs.uiuc.edu
          Reporter: daniel.malea at intel.com
    Classification: Unclassified

>From an email thread with Greg Clayton, here are the steps to reproduce:

./lldb
(lldb) file /bin/ls
Current executable set to '/bin/ls' (x86_64).
(lldb) b malloc
Breakpoint 1: no locations (pending).
WARNING:  Unable to resolve breakpoint to any actual locations.
(lldb) r
Process 6985 launched: '/bin/ls' (x86_64)
1 location added to breakpoint 1
1 location added to breakpoint 1
Process 6985 stopped
* thread #1: tid = 0x1b49, 0x00007ff63da9ff50 libc.so.6`__libc_malloc,
stop reason = breakpoint 1.1
   frame #0: 0x00007ff63da9ff50 libc.so.6`__libc_malloc
libc.so.6`__libc_malloc:
-> 0x7ff63da9ff50:  movq   %r12, -16(%rsp)
libc.so.6`malloc + 5:
  0x7ff63da9ff55:  movq   %rbx, -32(%rsp)
  0x7ff63da9ff5a:  movq   %rdi, %r12
  0x7ff63da9ff5d:  movq   %rbp, -24(%rsp)



Instead of printing the function name as "__libc_malloc" LLDB should print
"malloc" which is more user friendly and actually matches what the user
requested. A test case for this is also required, but should be simple enough
to add to one of the breakpoint test cases.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/lldb-dev/attachments/20130508/622ac959/attachment.html>