Harden gdb.base/step-over-syscall.exp
New in v3: - Verify if the syscall number matches what is expected for the target. - Used gdb_assert for one more check. New in v2: - Set initial values to -1 instead of 0. - Rewrote RE to prevent unexpected matching when parsing one character at a time. - Used gdb_assert for an additional check. - Validated with check-read1 There are a couple problems with this test. First -- gdb.base/step-over-syscall.exp records the address of a syscall instruction within fork/vfork/clone functions and also the address of the instruction after that syscall instruction. It uses these couples addresses to make sure we stepped over a syscall instruction (fork/vfork/clone events) correctly. The way the test fetches the addresses of the instructions is by stepi-ing its way through the fork/vfork/clone functions until it finds a match for a syscall. Then it stepi's once again to get the address of the next instruction. This assumes that stepi-ing over a syscall is working correctly and landing in the right PC. This is not the case for AArch64/Linux, where we're landing a couple instructions after the syscall in some cases. The following patch lets the test execute as before, but adds a new instruction address check using the x command as opposed to stepi. I didn't want to change how the test works since we may also be interested in checking if stepi-ing over the syscall under different conditions (displaced stepping on/off) yields the same results. I don't feel strongly about this, so i'm OK with changing how we compare PC's for the entire test if folks decide it is reasonable. Second -- FAIL: gdb.base/step-over-syscall.exp: vfork: displaced=off: continue to vfork (3rd time) (the program exited) FAIL: gdb.base/step-over-syscall.exp: vfork: displaced=off: continue to syscall insn vfork (the program is no longer running) FAIL: gdb.base/step-over-syscall.exp: vfork: displaced=off: single step over vfork (the program is no longer running) Depending on the glibc version we may have different code generated for the fork/vfork/clone functions. I ran into the situation where vfork for newer glibc's on AArch64/Linux is very short, so "break vfork" will put a breakpoint right at the syscall instruction, which is something the testcase isn't expecting (a off-by-1 of sorts). The patch adds extra code to handle this case. If the test detects we're already sitting at a syscall instruction, it records the address and moves on to record the address after that particular instruction. Another measure is to "break *$syscall" instead of "break $syscall". That guarantees we're stopping at the first instruction of the syscall function, if it ever happens that the syscall instruction is the first instruction of those functions. With these changes i can fix some failures for aarch64-linux-gnu and also expose the problems i've reported here: https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2019-12/msg01071.html These tests now fail for aarch64-linux-gnu (patch for this is going through reviews): FAIL: gdb.base/step-over-syscall.exp: vfork: displaced=off: pc after stepi matches insn addr after syscall FAIL: gdb.base/step-over-syscall.exp: vfork: displaced=on: pc after stepi matches insn addr after syscall gdb/testsuite/ChangeLog: 2020-01-27 Luis Machado <luis.machado@linaro.org> * gdb.base/step-over-syscall.exp (setup): Check if we're already sitting at a syscall instruction when we hit the syscall function's breakpoint. Check PC against one obtained with the x command. Validate syscall number. (step_over_syscall): Don't continue to the syscall instruction if we're already there.
Loading
Please register or sign in to comment