[lldb-dev] PATCH for REVIEW - Fix [Bug 15038] LLDB does not support printing wide-character variables on Linux
Enrico Granata
egranata at apple.com
Mon Apr 1 15:49:12 PDT 2013
On Apr 1, 2013, at 2:50 PM, "Thirumurthi, Ashok" <ashok.thirumurthi at intel.com> wrote:
> Hi Enrico,
>
> Ø If we go this route, the same thing might have to be done for ValueObject::ReadPointedString() which does the same kind of “unbounded read”
> I see. Looking through the code base for methods that call GetMaximumSizeOfStringSummary, I see that there are a number of code paths to handle. The attached patch lowers the fix so that this functionality can be used as needed via a helper method in Process to validate an unbounded read.
>
We already have a Process::ReadCStringFromMemory - that does read&validation
You might instead want to consider making a Process::ReadWStringFromMemory
The mere act of validating that a buffer is 0-terminated is not a Process specific operation at all
> Ø But I am inclined to believe the best option would be to adopt your ProcessMonitor fix that reads smaller and smaller chunks and then returns the number of bytes read and no error
> Well, the unbounded read is a characteristic of the use case (i.e. string reads), not the implementation. The behavior of the plug-in under this type of request is implementation specific, and an error is always reasonable since there was a failure to read the requested size in bytes. My point is that the corner case of null terminator in the last 8-byte read needs to be tested and fixed.
>
> Ø What troubles me a little with the overall idea of this patch is that we are putting a workaround for a lower-level issue in higher-level code.
> Ø I would prefer, if we do this, that at least we put the code around #if defined (__linux__), as in:
> Ø What we have here is a Linux-specific implementation issue
> Note that the issue can appear with any ptrace implementation. So, I lowered the fix to the ProcessPOSIX plugin, which is consistent with the case of eErrorTypePOSIX.
I don’t think that is a Process responsibility to validate a buffer
If you want to make it a new type of request, ReadWString, and pass it a size so it knows how many consecutive bytes must be 0 to mean EndOfData, that would be fine.
It would look like
size_t Process::ReadWStringFromInferior(const void* buffer, size_t max_size, Error& error, size_t sizeofitem);
and there you could check the end-of-string
Then the WString data formatter can be moved to use this new read request, but you will have to ensure that partial strings are accepted :-)
Thanks,
Enrico Granata
✉ egranata@.com
✆ 27683
>
> Thanks again for the feedback,
> - Ashok
>
>
> From: Enrico Granata [mailto:egranata at apple.com]
> Sent: Thursday, March 28, 2013 2:39 PM
> To: Thirumurthi, Ashok
> Cc: lldb-dev at cs.uiuc.edu
> Subject: Re: [lldb-dev] PATCH for REVIEW - Fix [Bug 15038] LLDB does not support printing wide-character variables on Linux
>
> Hi,
> now I pretty much see where you are coming from.
> What we have here is a Linux-specific implementation issue (which of course is not going to get fixed anytime soon :-)
>
> What troubles me a little with the overall idea of this patch is that we are putting a workaround for a lower-level issue in higher-level code.
> If we go this route, the same thing might have to be done for ValueObject::ReadPointedString() which does the same kind of “unbounded read”
> I would prefer, if we do this, that at least we put the code around #if defined (__linux__), as in:
> if (error.Fail() || data_read == 0)
> {
> + bool found = false;
> #if defined (__linux__)
> + if (data_read && error.GetType() == eErrorTypePOSIX) {
> + // Determine if a null terminator was found in spite of an out-of-bounds read
> + if (error.GetError() == EIO || error.GetError() == EFAULT) {
> + char* buffer = reinterpret_cast<char *>(buffer_sp->GetBytes());
> + char terminator[4] = {'\0', '\0', '\0', '\0'};
> + assert(sizeof(terminator) >= type_size && "Atempting to read a wchar with more than 4 bytes per character!");
> +
> + for (size_t i = 0; !found && (i + type_size <= data_read); i += type_size)
> + if (::strncmp(&buffer[i], terminator, type_size) == 0)
> + found = true; // null terminator
> + }
> + }
> #endif
> + if (!found) {
> + stream.Printf("unable to read data");
> + return true;
> }
> }
>
> This will maintain a clean behavior for non-Linux systems (and other systems with a similarly broken API can opt-in this behavior by adding themselves to the ifdef)
>
> But I am inclined to believe the best option would be to adopt your ProcessMonitor fix that reads smaller and smaller chunks and then returns the number of bytes read and no error - that would make all unbounded-read-based calls just work without having to add Linux-specific patches around (main issue being that now we all have to remember that anything that reads a string-like thing has to add a similar workaround or cause Linux unhappiness)
>
> If that is not going to be viable, or will take some time, I don’t want to keep you blocked, so I would suggest:
> - commit this patch with #ifdef markers to keep it Linux-only
> - file a bugzilla issue to make process reads as functional as possible on Linux
>
> Thoughts?
>
> Enrico Granata
> ✉ egranata@.com
> ✆ 27683
>
> On Mar 28, 2013, at 8:39 AM, "Thirumurthi, Ashok" <ashok.thirumurthi at intel.com> wrote:
>
>
> Thanks for the feedback, Enrico,
>
> I’m relying on the fact that when the wstring is larger than the default size (1GB in your example), we won’t get a ptrace error like EIO or EFAULT. So, there will be no search for a null terminator.
>
> If we can’t rely on the null terminator, it’s hard to know if a different error occurred. The trouble is that there is inconsistency in the PTRACE_PEEK implementation on Linux that is more or less arbitrary (sigh), so the out-of-bounds read can generate EIO or EFAULT. In particular, EIO can mean a number of things:
> “request is invalid, or an attempt was made to read from or write to an invalid area in the parent's or child's memory, or there was a word-alignment violation, or an invalid signal was specified during a restart request.” –http://linux.die.net/man/2/ptrace
>
> In addition, the Linux ProcessMonitor reads in 8-byte chunks, so ReadUTFBufferAndDumpToStream will probably fail (for the right reasons) in the case where at least part of the null terminator was in that block. I see that as an implementation detail that can be resolved in ProcessMonitor by reading smaller chunks until PTRACE_PEEK succeeds (i.e. a good follow-up patch).
>
> Do let me know if you feel this is okay to commit as is. Cheers,
>
> - Ashok
>
> From: Enrico Granata [mailto:egranata at apple.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, March 27, 2013 6:18 PM
> To: Thirumurthi, Ashok
> Cc: lldb-dev at cs.uiuc.edu
> Subject: Re: [lldb-dev] PATCH for REVIEW - Fix [Bug 15038] LLDB does not support printing wide-character variables on Linux
>
> Hi Ashok,
> thanks for submitting an LLDB patch :)
>
> I have looked at the code and while I see where the patch is coming from, I see a potential issue with it.
>
> The code in ReadUTFBufferAndDumpToStream, which is what you are editing, is meant to work on a partial string (i.e. one that does not have a NULL terminator at the end). The reason for that is that you might have a wstring that is 1GB long and we would not want to try and read all of it and then display it. What we do is pick a size and only extract that much data. For obvious reasons, your string might be longer than our upper boundary, so you would get a chunk of valid bytes and then no end-of-buffer marker.
>
> It looks like your code would fail in that case and produce no summary for a string if an EIO was received before \0.
>
> Is there any reason why you can’t just check if (error == EIO and data_read > 0) and if so treat this as a “partial string” condition and keep going?
> Would that break/crash anything?
>
> Best,
> Enrico Granata
> ✉ egranata@.com
> ✆ 27683
>
> On Mar 27, 2013, at 2:52 PM, "Thirumurthi, Ashok" <ashok.thirumurthi at intel.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> The root cause for Bug 15038 is a ptrace EIO that can occur because we don't know the size of a (UTF) string and so read a fixed number of characters for strings. The attached fix accepts EIO in the case where data has been read and a null terminator of the correct size and alignment was found.
>
> - Ashok
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: lldb-dev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu [mailto:lldb-dev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu] On Behalf Ofbugzilla-daemon at llvm.org
> Sent: Tuesday, January 22, 2013 10:13 AM
> To: lldb-dev at cs.uiuc.edu
> Subject: [lldb-dev] [Bug 15038] New: LLDB does not support printing wide-character variables on Linux
>
> http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=15038
>
> Bug #: 15038
> Summary: LLDB does not support printing wide-character
> variables on Linux
> Product: lldb
> Version: unspecified
> Platform: PC
> OS/Version: Linux
> Status: NEW
> Severity: enhancement
> Priority: P
> Component: All Bugs
> AssignedTo: lldb-dev at cs.uiuc.edu
> ReportedBy: daniel.malea at intel.com
> Classification: Unclassified
>
>
> Printing a variable of wchar_t type does not behave as expected and results in garbage being printed on the screen.
>
> To reproduce, remove the @expectedFailureLinux decorator from TestChar1632T.py and TestCxxWCharT.py and run:
>
> python dotest.py --executable <path-to-lldb> lang/cpp/char1632_t lang/cpp/wchar_t
>
> --
> Configure bugmail: http://llvm.org/bugs/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
> ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the assignee for the bug.
> _______________________________________________
> lldb-dev mailing list
> lldb-dev at cs.uiuc.edu
> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/lldb-dev
> <read-strings.diff>_______________________________________________
> lldb-dev mailing list
> lldb-dev at cs.uiuc.edu
> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/lldb-dev
>
> <read-strings-2.diff>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/lldb-dev/attachments/20130401/a5c3a997/attachment.html>
More information about the lldb-dev
mailing list