[lldb-dev] lldb test failures on 32bit

Michael Sartain mikesart at gmail.com
Fri Aug 9 17:39:40 PDT 2013


I'm starting to look at this now. I think there are some symbol issues on
32-bit as well. When running the code below in x64, the "disassemble -n
main" recognizes the symbol stub for printf for the call statement, and the
"disassemble -a addr" works as well.

I'll continue looking at this next week. Thanks Andy.
 -Mike

mikesart at mikesart64:~/data/src/blah/build$ lldb -- hello_world
Current executable set to 'hello_world' (i386).

(lldb) b main
Breakpoint 1: where = hello_world`main + 24 at hello_world.cpp:6, address =
0x080485b8

(lldb) r
Process 5933 launched: '/home/mikesart/data/src/blah/build/hello_world'
(i386)
Process 5933 stopped
* thread #1: tid = 5933, 0x080485b8 hello_world`main(argc=1,
argv=0xffe770f4) + 24 at hello_world.cpp:6, name = 'hello_world', stop
reason = breakpoint 1.1
    frame #0: 0x080485b8 hello_world`main(argc=1, argv=0xffe770f4) + 24 at
hello_world.cpp:6
   3
   4    int main( int argc, char *argv[] )
   5    {
-> 6            printf("hello world.\n");
   7    }

(lldb) disassemble -n main
hello_world`main at hello_world.cpp:5:
   0x80485a0:  pushl  %ebp
   0x80485a1:  movl   %esp, %ebp
   0x80485a3:  subl   $0x18, %esp
   0x80485a6:  movl   0xc(%ebp), %eax
   0x80485a9:  movl   0x8(%ebp), %ecx
   0x80485ac:  leal   0x80486a0, %edx
   0x80485b2:  movl   %ecx, -0x4(%ebp)
   0x80485b5:  movl   %eax, -0x8(%ebp)
-> 0x80485b8:  movl   %edx, (%esp)
   0x80485bb:  calll  0x80484d0
   0x80485c0:  movl   $0x0, %ecx
   0x80485c5:  movl   %eax, -0xc(%ebp)
   0x80485c8:  movl   %ecx, %eax
   0x80485ca:  addl   $0x18, %esp
   0x80485cd:  popl   %ebp
   0x80485ce:  ret

(lldb) disassemble -a 0x80484d0
error: Could not find function bounds for address 0x80484d0

(lldb) disassemble -s 0x80484d0
   0x80484d0:  jmpl   *0x804a008
   0x80484d6:  pushl  $0x10
   0x80484db:  jmp    0x80484a0                 ; hello_world..plt + 0
hello_world`_start + 64:
   0x80484e0:  xorl   %ebp, %ebp

On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 2:55 PM, Kaylor, Andrew <andrew.kaylor at intel.com>wrote:

>  Hi Mike,****
>
> ** **
>
> I investigated this a little further and it seems that the problem is that
> when LLDB tries to unwind the stack from the point of the ‘jmp’ instruction
> in the printf stub it incorrectly calculates the call frame address.  The
> log output indicates that it is using ESP+12 as the call frame address
> based on information from the FDE table.  Consequently, it is looking for
> the return address at ESP+8, but that’s wrong.  (I believe it’s actually at
> ESP-4.)  It’s possible that this is still a matter of the register context
> getting some registers confused because of the 32-bit mapping but if so the
> point of failure is less obvious.****
>
> ** **
>
> It turns out that the variation of the code that I had that seemed to be
> working was actually working for the wrong reason.  It was still looking
> for the frame 1 pc in the wrong location, but that location just happened
> to contain a non-zero value so the validity check passed over it.****
>
> ** **
>
> That’s as far as I’ve gotten in my investigation.  I’m going to be on
> vacation for a week after tomorrow and I have some other things I need to
> get done before then, so if you want to pick this up from here feel free to
> do so.  If not, I’ll try to get back to it in early August.****
>
> ** **
>
> -Andy****
>
> ** **
>
> ** **
>
> *From:* Michael Sartain [mailto:mikesart at gmail.com]
> *Sent:* Friday, July 19, 2013 4:24 PM
> *To:* Kaylor, Andrew
> *Cc:* lldb-dev at cs.uiuc.edu; Malea, Daniel; Kopec, Matt; Thirumurthi, Ashok
> *Subject:* Re: lldb test failures on 32bit****
>
> ** **
>
> I applied both patches, and the 'expr (int)printf("blah\n")' statement now
> works, but "n" over the printf() statement in the code still throws me
> somewhere else entirely. I'm on the call printf() asm instruction down
> below, I type "ni", and I wind up at address 0x80486f0.****
>
> ** **
>
> Is this working for you?****
>
> ** **
>
> And thanks for looking at this Andrew. Very cool we can call functions now
> in 32-bit targets...****
>
>  -Mike****
>
> ** **
>
> (lldb) ni****
>
> Process 18815 stopped****
>
> * thread #1: tid = 0x497f, 0x08048855 blah`main(argc=1, argv=0xff985674) +
> 37 at blah.cpp:29, name = 'blah, stop reason = instruction step over****
>
>     frame #0: 0x08048855 blah`main(argc=1, argv=0xff985674) + 37 at
> blah.cpp:29****
>
>    26  ****
>
>    27   int main( int argc, char *argv[] )****
>
>    28   {****
>
> -> 29           printf("hello world.\n");****
>
>    30  ****
>
>    31           Set *foo = new Set();****
>
>    32  ****
>
> (lldb) disassemble ****
>
> blah`main at blah.cpp:28:****
>
>    0x8048830:  push   EBP****
>
>    0x8048831:  mov    EBP, ESP****
>
>    0x8048833:  push   ESI****
>
>    0x8048834:  sub    ESP, 32820****
>
>    0x804883a:  mov    EAX, DWORD PTR [EBP + 12]****
>
>    0x804883d:  mov    ECX, DWORD PTR [EBP + 8]****
>
>    0x8048840:  mov    DWORD PTR [EBP - 8], 0****
>
>    0x8048847:  mov    DWORD PTR [EBP - 12], ECX****
>
>    0x804884a:  mov    DWORD PTR [EBP - 16], EAX****
>
>    0x804884d:  mov    EAX, ESP****
>
>    0x804884f:  mov    DWORD PTR [EAX], 134515168****
>
> -> 0x8048855:  call   0x80486f0****
>
>    0x804885a:  mov    ECX, ESP****
>
>    0x804885c:  mov    DWORD PTR [ECX], 1****
>
>    0x8048862:  mov    DWORD PTR [EBP - 32804], EAX****
>
>    0x8048868:  call   0x8048700****
>
>    0x804886d:  mov    ECX, EAX****
>
>    0x804886f:  mov    EDX, EAX****
>
>    0x8048871:  mov    ESI, ESP****
>
>    0x8048873:  mov    DWORD PTR [ESI], EAX****
>
>    0x8048875:  mov    DWORD PTR [EBP - 32808], EDX****
>
>    0x804887b:  mov    DWORD PTR [EBP - 32812], ECX****
>
>    0x8048881:  call   0x8048800                 ; Set at blah.cpp:23****
>
>    0x8048886:  jmp    0x804888b                 ; main + 91 at blah.cpp:31
> ****
>
>    0x804888b:  mov    EAX, DWORD PTR [EBP - 32812]****
>
>    0x8048891:  mov    DWORD PTR [EBP - 20], EAX****
>
>    0x8048894:  mov    DWORD PTR [EBP - 32800], 0****
>
>    0x804889e:  cmp    DWORD PTR [EBP - 32800], 8192****
>
>    0x80488a8:  jae    0x80488ef                 ; main + 191 at blah.cpp:38
> ****
>
>    0x80488ae:  call   0x8048710****
>
>    0x80488b3:  mov    ECX, DWORD PTR [EBP - 32800]****
>
>    0x80488b9:  mov    DWORD PTR [EBP + 4*ECX - 32796], EAX****
>
>    0x80488c0:  mov    EAX, DWORD PTR [EBP - 32800]****
>
>    0x80488c6:  add    EAX, 1****
>
>    0x80488cb:  mov    DWORD PTR [EBP - 32800], EAX****
>
>    0x80488d1:  jmp    0x804889e                 ; main + 110 at blah.cpp:34
> ****
>
>    0x80488d6:  mov    DWORD PTR [EBP - 24], EAX****
>
>    0x80488d9:  mov    DWORD PTR [EBP - 28], EDX****
>
>    0x80488dc:  mov    EAX, DWORD PTR [EBP - 32808]****
>
>    0x80488e2:  mov    DWORD PTR [ESP], EAX****
>
>    0x80488e5:  call   0x80486d0                 ; symbol stub for:
> _Unwind_Resume****
>
>    0x80488ea:  jmp    0x80488fb                 ; main + 203 at blah.cpp:31
> ****
>
>    0x80488ef:  mov    EAX, DWORD PTR [EBP - 8]****
>
>    0x80488f2:  add    ESP, 32820****
>
>    0x80488f8:  pop    ESI****
>
>    0x80488f9:  pop    EBP****
>
>    0x80488fa:  ret    ****
>
>    0x80488fb:  mov    EAX, DWORD PTR [EBP - 24]****
>
>    0x80488fe:  mov    DWORD PTR [ESP], EAX****
>
>    0x8048901:  call   0x8048730****
>
> (lldb) ni****
>
> Process 18815 stopped****
>
> * thread #1: tid = 0x497f, 0x080486f0 blah, name = 'blah, stop reason =
> instruction step over****
>
>     frame #0: 0x080486f0 blah****
>
> -> 0x80486f0:  jmp    DWORD PTR [134520844]****
>
>    0x80486f6:  push   24****
>
>    0x80486fb:  jmp    0x80486b0                 ; blah..plt + 0****
>
>    0x8048700:  jmp    DWORD PTR [134520848]****
>
> ** **
>
> On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 3:34 PM, Kaylor, Andrew <andrew.kaylor at intel.com>
> wrote:****
>
> Hi Mike,****
>
>  ****
>
> I think I’ve tracked down the sources of both of these problems.****
>
>  ****
>
> The problem with not being able to call functions in the target seems to
> be a failure in the MCJIT relocation mechanism.  Because LLDB is generating
> IR with absolute addresses for function calls, the JITed code contains
> relocations with absolute values rather than symbols.  This is a problem I
> fixed a short time ago, but it seems to have come undone again (at least in
> this particular case).  The attached ‘reloc-fix-32.patch’ (to be applied to
> the LLVM repository) should fix that.****
>
>  ****
>
> I need to do a bit of investigation to settle some questions about why
> this condition came back or was specific to the 32-bit case before I commit
> this, but I think this is correct.****
>
>  ****
>
> The problem where you lose source after stepping seems to be a matter of
> incorrect stack unwinding.  There were two problems lurking here.****
>
>  ****
>
> First, the RegisterContext::ConvertBetweenRegisterKinds() function wasn’t
> making any provision for a 32-bit inferior running on a 64-bit target.  The
> way the x86-64 register context class is implemented it defines 64-bit
> registers and 32-bit registers in the same RegisterInfo structure, and
> there is some overlap in how these get mapped to DWARF/GDB/GCC register
> numbers.  RegisterContext::ConvertBetweenRegisterKinds() was just iterating
> through the list and returning the first match it found, which was the
> 64-bit register.****
>
>  ****
>
> I added a special case to call
> RegisterContext::ConvertRegisterKindToRegisterNumber() when the target kind
> is eRegisterKindLLDB.  This invokes the RegisterContext_x86_64 overload of
> that method which knows how to distinguish the 32-bit and 64-bit
> registers.  I’m not convinced that this is the best way to solve this
> problem, but it works.****
>
>  ****
>
> The second issue was that the ABIMacOSX_i386 plug-in (which also gets used
> for 32-bit inferiors on Linux) was rejecting call frame addresses that
> weren’t 8-byte aligned whereas, at least on Linux, 4-byte alignment is
> allowed.  If 32-bit processes on MacOSX require 8-byte alignment then we’ll
> need to do some additional checking, but for now I just modified it to only
> check for 4-byte alignment.****
>
>  ****
>
> Both of the stack unwinding issues should be fixed by the attached
> ‘stack-fix-32.patch’ file.****
>
>  ****
>
> Can you try out these patches and verify that they work for you?****
>
>  ****
>
> Thanks,****
>
> Andy****
>
>  ****
>
> *From:* Michael Sartain [mailto:mikesart at gmail.com] ****
>
> *Sent:* Tuesday, July 16, 2013 6:14 PM
> *To:* Malea, Daniel; Kaylor, Andrew; Kopec, Matt; Thirumurthi, Ashok
> *Cc:* Matthew Sorrels****
>
> *Subject:* Fwd: lldb test failures on 32bit****
>
>  ****
>
> I think the below are the largest 32-bit blocking issues right now.****
>
>  ****
>
> Is this something any of you have any familiarity with and have time to
> look at?****
>
>  ****
>
> If not, let me know and I'll start investigating...****
>
>  ****
>
> Thanks much!****
>
>  -Mike****
>
>  ****
>
> #################################****
>
> ## Can't call functions in target****
>
> #################################****
>
> mikesart at mikesart-rad:~/data/src/blah2/build$ lldb -x -- blah****
>
> Current executable set to 'blah' (i386).****
>
> (lldb) b main****
>
> Breakpoint 1: where = blah`main + 29 at blah.cpp:29, address = 0x0804884d*
> ***
>
> (lldb) r****
>
> Process 6745 launched: '/home/mikesart/data/src/blah2/build/blah' (i386)**
> **
>
> Process 6745 stopped****
>
> * thread #1: tid = 0x1a59, 0x0804884d blah`main(argc=1, argv=0xfffc8c54) +
> 29 at blah.cpp:29, name = 'blah, stop reason = breakpoint 1.1****
>
>     frame #0: 0x0804884d blah`main(argc=1, argv=0xfffc8c54) + 29 at
> blah.cpp:29****
>
>    26  ****
>
>    27   int main( int argc, char *argv[] )****
>
>    28   {****
>
> -> 29           printf("hello world.\n");****
>
>    30  ****
>
>    31           Set *foo = new Set();****
>
>    32  ****
>
> (lldb) expr (int)printf("hi there!\n");****
>
> error: Execution was interrupted, reason: invalid address (fault address:
> 0xeef60020).****
>
> The process has been returned to the state before expression evaluation.**
> **
>
> (lldb) n****
>
> Process 6745 exited with status = -1 (0xffffffff) ****
>
>  ****
>
> #################################****
>
> ## Lose source with first next command****
>
> #################################****
>
> mikesart at mikesart-rad:~/data/src/blah2/build$ lldb -x -- blah****
>
> Current executable set to 'blah' (i386).****
>
> (lldb) b main****
>
> Breakpoint 1: where = blah`main + 29 at blah.cpp:29, address = 0x0804884d*
> ***
>
> (lldb) r****
>
> Process 7471 launched: '/home/mikesart/data/src/blah2/build/blah' (i386)**
> **
>
> Process 7471 stopped****
>
> * thread #1: tid = 0x1d2f, 0x0804884d blah`main(argc=1, argv=0xffb36464) +
> 29 at blah.cpp:29, name = 'blah, stop reason = breakpoint 1.1****
>
>     frame #0: 0x0804884d blah`main(argc=1, argv=0xffb36464) + 29 at
> blah.cpp:29****
>
>    26  ****
>
>    27   int main( int argc, char *argv[] )****
>
>    28   {****
>
> -> 29           printf("hello world.\n");****
>
>    30  ****
>
>    31           Set *foo = new Set();****
>
>    32  ****
>
> (lldb) n****
>
> Process 7471 stopped****
>
> * thread #1: tid = 0x1d2f, 0x080486f0 blah, name = 'blah, stop reason =
> step over****
>
>     frame #0: 0x080486f0 blah****
>
> -> 0x80486f0:  jmpl   *134520844****
>
>    0x80486f6:  pushl  $24****
>
>    0x80486fb:  jmp    0x80486b0                 ; blah..plt + 0****
>
>    0x8048700:  jmpl   *134520848****
>
> (lldb) ****
>
> ** **
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/lldb-dev/attachments/20130809/59a1cd94/attachment.html>


More information about the lldb-dev mailing list