If you can debug a failing case, and do whatever step operation got you to the
wrong place, then run up to that step, and do:
(lldb) log enable -f <SOMEFILE> lldb step
and then do the step, then send me that log plus the disassembly for the
function you were stepping in and the output of:
(lldb) image dump line-table <SourceFile>
for the source file you were stepping in.
I should be able to see from there why we were stepping to the wrong place.
Jim
> On Nov 12, 2015, at 4:03 PM, Zachary Turner <ztur...@google.com> wrote:
>
> The error messages are always different because the error message is printed
> by the test. I'm going to try to load up the executable for TestStepNoDebug
> in the debugger and get a disassembly and do the step
>
> On Thu, Nov 12, 2015 at 4:01 PM Jim Ingham <jing...@apple.com> wrote:
> Is the line they stepped to - instead of the expected line - always line 0?
>
> Jim
>
> > On Nov 12, 2015, at 3:52 PM, Zachary Turner <ztur...@google.com> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Jim,
> >
> > This breaks about 12 tests on Windows. The patch looks simple, but this
> > isn't really my area, is there anything I can give you to help diagnose
> > what might be wrong? The following tests fail:
> >
> > FAIL: LLDB (suite) :: Test-rdar-9974002.py (Windows zturner-win81 8
> > 6.2.9200 AMD64 Intel64 Family 6 Model 45 Stepping 7, GenuineIntel)
> > FAIL: LLDB (suite) :: TestDataFormatterHexCaps.py (Windows zturner-win81 8
> > 6.2.9200 AMD64 Intel64 Family 6 Model 45 Stepping 7, GenuineIntel)
> > FAIL: LLDB (suite) :: TestDataFormatterNamedSummaries.py (Windows
> > zturner-win81 8 6.2.9200 AMD64 Intel64 Family 6 Model 45 Stepping 7,
> > GenuineIntel)
> > FAIL: LLDB (suite) :: TestDataFormatterPythonSynth.py (Windows
> > zturner-win81 8 6.2.9200 AMD64 Intel64 Family 6 Model 45 Stepping 7,
> > GenuineIntel)
> > FAIL: LLDB (suite) :: TestDataFormatterSynth.py (Windows zturner-win81 8
> > 6.2.9200 AMD64 Intel64 Family 6 Model 45 Stepping 7, GenuineIntel)
> > FAIL: LLDB (suite) :: TestDiamond.py (Windows zturner-win81 8 6.2.9200
> > AMD64 Intel64 Family 6 Model 45 Stepping 7, GenuineIntel)
> > FAIL: LLDB (suite) :: TestFormatPropagation.py (Windows zturner-win81 8
> > 6.2.9200 AMD64 Intel64 Family 6 Model 45 Stepping 7, GenuineIntel)
> > FAIL: LLDB (suite) :: TestFrames.py (Windows zturner-win81 8 6.2.9200 AMD64
> > Intel64 Family 6 Model 45 Stepping 7, GenuineIntel)
> > FAIL: LLDB (suite) :: TestInlineStepping.py (Windows zturner-win81 8
> > 6.2.9200 AMD64 Intel64 Family 6 Model 45 Stepping 7, GenuineIntel)
> > FAIL: LLDB (suite) :: TestSBData.py (Windows zturner-win81 8 6.2.9200 AMD64
> > Intel64 Family 6 Model 45 Stepping 7, GenuineIntel)
> > FAIL: LLDB (suite) :: TestStepNoDebug.py (Windows zturner-win81 8 6.2.9200
> > AMD64 Intel64 Family 6 Model 45 Stepping 7, GenuineIntel)
> > FAIL: LLDB (suite) :: TestThreadJump.py (Windows zturner-win81 8 6.2.9200
> > AMD64 Intel64 Family 6 Model 45 Stepping 7, GenuineIntel)
> >
> > And here's the error I get from one of the failing tests, although I don't
> > know how much insight it provides.
> >
> > Traceback (most recent call last):
> > File "D:\src\llvm\tools\lldb\packages\Python\lldbsuite\test\lldbtest.py",
> > line 536, in wrapper
> > return func(self, *args, **kwargs)
> > File "D:\src\llvm\tools\lldb\packages\Python\lldbsuite\test\lldbtest.py",
> > line 2228, in dwarf_test_method
> > return attrvalue(self)
> > File "D:\src\llvm\tools\lldb\packages\Python\lldbsuite\test\lldbtest.py",
> > line 608, in wrapper
> > func(*args, **kwargs)
> > File
> > "D:\src\llvm\tools\lldb\packages\Python\lldbsuite\test\functionalities\step-avoids-no-debug\TestStepNoDebug.py",
> > line 41, in test_step_in_with_python
> > self.do_step_in_past_nodebug()
> > File
> > "D:\src\llvm\tools\lldb\packages\Python\lldbsuite\test\functionalities\step-avoids-no-debug\TestStepNoDebug.py",
> > line 105, in do_step_in_past_nodebug
> > self.hit_correct_line ("intermediate_return_value =
> > called_from_nodebug_actual(some_value)")
> > File
> > "D:\src\llvm\tools\lldb\packages\Python\lldbsuite\test\functionalities\step-avoids-no-debug\TestStepNoDebug.py",
> > line 57, in hit_correct_line
> > self.assertTrue (cur_line == target_line, "Stepped to line %d instead
> > of expected %d with pattern '%s'."%(cur_line, target_line, pattern))
> > AssertionError: False is not True : Stepped to line 0 instead of expected
> > 19 with pattern 'intermediate_return_value =
> > called_from_nodebug_actual(some_value)'.
> > Config=i686-d:\src\llvmbuild\ninja_release\bin\clang.exe
> > Session info generated @ Thu Nov 12 15:44:43 2015
> > To rerun this test, issue the following command from the 'test' directory:
> >
> > If it's not obvious what the problem is, can we revert this until we figure
> > it out and then reland it?
> >
> > On Thu, Nov 12, 2015 at 2:34 PM Jim Ingham via lldb-commits
> > <lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org> wrote:
> > Author: jingham
> > Date: Thu Nov 12 16:32:09 2015
> > New Revision: 252963
> >
> > URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=252963&view=rev
> > Log:
> > Another little stepping optimization: if any of the source step commands
> > are running through a range
> > of addresses, and the range has no branches, instead of running to the last
> > instruction and
> > single-stepping over that, run to the first instruction after the end of
> > the range. If there
> > are no branches in the current range, then the bytes right after it have to
> > be in the current
> > function, and have to be instructions not data in code, so this is safe.
> > And it cuts down one
> > extra stepi per source range step.
> >
> > Incidentally, this also works around a bug in the llvm Intel assembler
> > where it treats the "rep"
> > prefix as a separate instruction from the repeated instruction. If that
> > were at the end of a
> > line range, then we would put a trap in place of the repeated instruction,
> > which is undefined
> > behavior. Current processors just ignore the repetition in this case,
> > which changes program behavior.
> > Since there would never be a line range break after the rep prefix, always
> > doing the range stepping
> > to the beginning of the new range avoids this problem.
> >
> > <rdar://problem/23461686>
> >
> > Modified:
> > lldb/trunk/source/Target/ThreadPlanStepRange.cpp
> >
> > Modified: lldb/trunk/source/Target/ThreadPlanStepRange.cpp
> > URL:
> > http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project/lldb/trunk/source/Target/ThreadPlanStepRange.cpp?rev=252963&r1=252962&r2=252963&view=diff
> > ==============================================================================
> > --- lldb/trunk/source/Target/ThreadPlanStepRange.cpp (original)
> > +++ lldb/trunk/source/Target/ThreadPlanStepRange.cpp Thu Nov 12 16:32:09
> > 2015
> > @@ -390,12 +390,19 @@ ThreadPlanStepRange::SetNextBranchBreakp
> > if (branch_index == UINT32_MAX)
> > {
> > branch_index = instructions->GetSize() - 1;
> > + InstructionSP last_inst =
> > instructions->GetInstructionAtIndex(branch_index);
> > + size_t last_inst_size = last_inst->GetOpcode().GetByteSize();
> > + run_to_address = last_inst->GetAddress();
> > + run_to_address.Slide(last_inst_size);
> > + }
> > + else if (branch_index - pc_index > 1)
> > + {
> > + run_to_address =
> > instructions->GetInstructionAtIndex(branch_index)->GetAddress();
> > }
> >
> > - if (branch_index - pc_index > 1)
> > + if (run_to_address.IsValid())
> > {
> > const bool is_internal = true;
> > - run_to_address =
> > instructions->GetInstructionAtIndex(branch_index)->GetAddress();
> > m_next_branch_bp_sp =
> > GetTarget().CreateBreakpoint(run_to_address, is_internal, false);
> > if (m_next_branch_bp_sp)
> > {
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > lldb-commits mailing list
> > lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
> > http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
>
_______________________________________________
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
