mirror of
https://github.com/espressif/binutils-gdb.git
synced 2025-05-24 10:46:24 +08:00

This patch came about because I wanted to write a frame unwinder that would corrupt the backtrace in a particular way. In order to achieve what I wanted I ended up trying to write an unwinder like this: class FrameId(object): .... snip class definition .... class TestUnwinder(Unwinder): def __init__(self): Unwinder.__init__(self, "some name") def __call__(self, pending_frame): pc_desc = pending_frame.architecture().registers().find("pc") pc = pending_frame.read_register(pc_desc) sp_desc = pending_frame.architecture().registers().find("sp") sp = pending_frame.read_register(sp_desc) # ... snip code to decide if this unwinder applies or not. fid = FrameId(pc, sp) unwinder = pending_frame.create_unwind_info(fid) unwinder.add_saved_register(pc_desc, pc) unwinder.add_saved_register(sp_desc, sp) return unwinder The important things here are the two calls: unwinder.add_saved_register(pc_desc, pc) unwinder.add_saved_register(sp_desc, sp) On x86-64 these would fail with an assertion error: gdb/regcache.c:168: internal-error: int register_size(gdbarch*, int): Assertion `regnum >= 0 && regnum < gdbarch_num_cooked_regs (gdbarch)' failed. What happens is that in unwind_infopy_add_saved_register (py-unwind.c) we call register_size, as register_size should only be called on cooked (real or pseudo) registers, and 'pc' and 'sp' are implemented as user registers (at least on x86-64), we trigger the assertion. A simple fix would be to check in unwind_infopy_add_saved_register if the register number we are handling is a cooked register or not, if not we can throw a 'Bad register' error back to the Python code. However, I think we can do better. Consider that at the CLI we can do this: (gdb) set $pc=0x1234 This works because GDB first evaluates '$pc' to get a register value, then evaluates '0x1234' to create a value encapsulating the immediate. The contents of the immediate value are then copied back to the location of the register value representing '$pc'. The value location for a user-register will (usually) be the location of the real register that was accessed, so on x86-64 we'd expect this to be $rip. So, in this patch I propose that in the unwinder code, when add_saved_register is called, if it is passed a user-register (i.e. non-cooked) then we first fetch the register, extract the real register number from the value's location, and use that new register number when handling the add_saved_register call. If either the value location that we get for the user-register is not a cooked register then we can throw a 'Bad register' error back to the Python code, but in most cases this will not happen. gdb/ChangeLog: * python/py-unwind.c (unwind_infopy_add_saved_register): Handle saving user registers. gdb/testsuite/ChangeLog: * gdb.python/py-unwind-user-regs.c: New file. * gdb.python/py-unwind-user-regs.exp: New file. * gdb.python/py-unwind-user-regs.py: New file.