I seen a similar issue when trying to debug an application with a lot of shared libraries (1000+) and in that case the problem was that lldb-server was too slow to respond what caused a connection timeout in lldb. Increasing plugin.process.gdb-remote.packet-timeout fixed the problem for me but it would be great if we can make the jModulesInfo packet faster in lldb-server.
Tamas On Wed, Apr 12, 2017 at 11:33 PM Greg Clayton <clayb...@gmail.com> wrote: > So the issue is with jModulesInfo. If it is too large we end up losing > connection. Not sure if this is on the send or receive side yet. But if I > comment out support for this packet, my debug sessions works just fine. > > Greg > > On Apr 12, 2017, at 10:42 AM, Greg Clayton <clayb...@gmail.com> wrote: > > What I now believe is happening is lldb-server is exiting for some reason > and then the process just runs and still shows the output in LLDB because > we hooked up the STDIO. I see lldb-server exits with an exit code of 0, but > no command had been sent to terminate it. I will track that down. > > Also, log_channels in lldb-gdbserver.cpp is using a llvm::StringRef > incorrectly: > > case 'c': // Log Channels > if (optarg && optarg[0]) > log_channels = StringRef(optarg); > break; > > Bad! This is exactly when we shouldn't be using llvm::StringRef. optarg is > a static variable and can change if there are any arguments after "-c > <args>". > > Greg > > On Apr 12, 2017, at 10:05 AM, Tamas Berghammer <tbergham...@google.com> > wrote: > > If the process is restarted by lldb-server then "posix ptrace" should have > some indication about it. Also "posix process" and "posix thread" can be > useful to understand the bigger picture (all of them in lldb-server). > > Note: You can enable them by setting LLDB_SERVER_LOG_CHANNELS > and LLDB_DEBUGSERVER_LOG_FILE environment variables before starting lldb. > > On Wed, Apr 12, 2017 at 5:11 PM Greg Clayton <clayb...@gmail.com> wrote: > > What is actually happening is we are stopped and handling the > EntryBreakpoint and are in the process of trying to load all shared > libraries, and then a signal (I am guessing) comes into the lldb-server and > causes the target to resume. Not sure if that is due to the signal passing > packet: > > > $QPassSignals:0e;1b;20;21;22;23;24;25;26;27;28;29;2a;2b;2c;2d;2e;2f;30;31;32;33;34;35;36;37;38;39;3a;3b;3c;3d;3e;3f;40#69 > > that gets sent these days. I will try removing this and seeing if it fixes > anything. > > Is there any logging I can enabled in lldb-server to catch the resume? I > haven't looked at the code but I finally proved what was happening last > night (target resumes while we are stopped at a breakpoint somehow). The > program runs and exits and when the shared libraries are finally done > loading, there is no connection to speak to. > > Greg > > On Apr 11, 2017, at 8:26 AM, Pavel Labath <lab...@google.com> wrote: > > > > On 11 April 2017 at 15:56, Greg Clayton <clayb...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Apr 11, 2017, at 5:33 AM, Pavel Labath <lab...@google.com> wrote: > > Are you sure this is not just an artifact of stdio buffering? I tried the > same experiment, but I placed a real log statement, and I could see that > all the LoadModuleAtAddress calls happen between the $T and $c packets in > the gdb-remote packet sequence. > > The module loading should be synchronous, so I think the problem lies > elsewhere. > > What is the nature of the breakpoint that is not getting hit? Can you > provide a repro case? The only bug like this that I am aware of is that we > fail to hit breakpoints in global constructors in shared libraries, but > that hasn't worked even in 3.8.. > > > I unfortunately can't attach a repro case. I will be able to track this > down, just need some pointers. I did notice that I wasn't able to hit > breakpoints in global constructors though... Do we know why? On Mac, we get > notified of shared libraries as they load so we never miss anything. Why > are we not able to get the same thing with linux? > > > It looks like we are intercepting the library load too late, but I haven't > investigated yet how to fix it. It's definitely possible (this works fine > in gdb), but I don't know how, as the dynamic linker is still a big unknown > to me. FWIW, I think I'll be messing with the dynamic loader plugin > soon(ish), so I'll try to fix this then. > > pl > > > > >
_______________________________________________ lldb-dev mailing list lldb-dev@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-dev
